* If you don't want to die, don't start a war! Many American media have called on China: Once a Sino-US war is inevitable, they have called on China not to attack American soldiers and not to attack American soldiers. It feels a little funny. War is a life-and-death situation. However, we don't let enemy soldiers attack but not attack enemy soldiers.
U.S. Army General Minihang has deceived the possibility of war with China in 2025, the Pentagon responded quickly after the news, saying it was only his personal opinion, not an official position, and obviously wanted to alleviate the tension atmosphere.
Netizens also had a very heated discussion. Many people think that this is a typical double standard in the United States. They have never been polite when they beat others in the past, but now they ask others to show mercy. Others worry that such remarks will make the contradiction between China and the United States more tense.
The U.S. media's appeal is actually to maintain the security of the U.S. mainland and reduce its own losses. While cooling down the Pentagon, the U.S. government is taking actions in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, and its attitude is quite ambiguous.
China has always emphasized the peaceful settlement of differences, but it will never give up its core interests and will definitely not accept such unreasonable demands. Do you think this appeal is particularly unreasonable when you see it here?
Let's talk again from the perspective of international law. There is a Geneva Convention in the world, which has clear provisions on combat behavior in war. The core is reciprocity, which means that both sides must abide by the same rules. It has not said which side can ask the other party not to hit its own people or touch its own territory, but instead emphasizes that it cannot seek unilateral immunity.
This set of appeals by the US media is not in line with the spirit of international law at all. To put it bluntly, it is to engage in special treatment, so that China can be tied in the war, but it can have no scruples. This is simply legally untenable.
Looking back at the history of the war, the United States did not strike other people's native land and military personnel, and during the Second World War, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Japan, directly striking Japan's mainland.
In the later Iraq War, the U.S. military not only attacked the Iraq army, but also bombed important cities in Iraq. At that time, why didn't the United States say that others should not hit it?
When it is your turn to face the risk, throw this strange appeal, the taste of the double-target is too thick.
Speaking of the real situation of China-U.S. relations, the Taiwan Sea and the South China Sea are now more sensitive places, and the United States often sends military ships and aircraft to those places to challenge, exacerbating regional tensions.
Minihan said that war may start in 2025. Although the Pentagon said this was a personal opinion, the United States has been strengthening its military deployment in the Asia-Pacific region in recent years and engaging in the so-called "anti-intervention system" confrontation. China is also improving its national defense capability to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Everyone knows that China and the United States are nuclear powers, and if they really fight together, the consequences are not playful, not only will the people of both countries suffer, but the global security and economy will suffer.
Let's talk about the remarks mentioned earlier. Although they were denied by the Pentagon, they also reflect that there are indeed some radical ideas within the U.S. military. Such remarks can easily mislead public opinion and make everyone feel that the Sino-US war is very close., exacerbating panic.
The Pentagon's response is actually a balance. It does not want to let radical internal remarks affect Sino-US relations, but also does not want to appear weak.
Netizens' hot remarks also show that everyone has clearly seen the double standards of the United States, and the ordinary people understand that there are no exceptions to war, and can not only allow the United States to take advantage.
The absurdity of this appeal by the US media is actually obvious, that is, putting one's own interests first, ignoring the basic logic of war and China's core interests.
They have forgotten that China has always been a peace-loving country, but peace does not rely on charity from others or compromise on one's own. If someone really imposes war on China, China will definitely fight back resolutely, protect its own people and territory, and will not be bound by such unreasonable appeals.
We have to be clear that the real risk does not come from China, but from the United States' constant provocation and double standards. If the United States really does not want to fight, it should stop its provocations in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, stop making these unreasonable remarks, and sit down and have an equal dialogue with China. This is the right way to maintain peace.
There is never a reason for only one side to punch in war, and peace is never achieved through unilateral compromise.
Everyone thinks that what is still hidden behind the U.S. discourse of the two sides that does not say exports? if China and the United States continue to fry on sensitive issues in the future, how can we better safeguard peace without losing our core interests?
U.S. Army General Minihang has deceived the possibility of war with China in 2025, the Pentagon responded quickly after the news, saying it was only his personal opinion, not an official position, and obviously wanted to alleviate the tension atmosphere.
Netizens also had a very heated discussion. Many people think that this is a typical double standard in the United States. They have never been polite when they beat others in the past, but now they ask others to show mercy. Others worry that such remarks will make the contradiction between China and the United States more tense.
The U.S. media's appeal is actually to maintain the security of the U.S. mainland and reduce its own losses. While cooling down the Pentagon, the U.S. government is taking actions in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, and its attitude is quite ambiguous.
China has always emphasized the peaceful settlement of differences, but it will never give up its core interests and will definitely not accept such unreasonable demands. Do you think this appeal is particularly unreasonable when you see it here?
Let's talk again from the perspective of international law. There is a Geneva Convention in the world, which has clear provisions on combat behavior in war. The core is reciprocity, which means that both sides must abide by the same rules. It has not said which side can ask the other party not to hit its own people or touch its own territory, but instead emphasizes that it cannot seek unilateral immunity.
This set of appeals by the US media is not in line with the spirit of international law at all. To put it bluntly, it is to engage in special treatment, so that China can be tied in the war, but it can have no scruples. This is simply legally untenable.
Looking back at the history of the war, the United States did not strike other people's native land and military personnel, and during the Second World War, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on Japan, directly striking Japan's mainland.
In the later Iraq War, the U.S. military not only attacked the Iraq army, but also bombed important cities in Iraq. At that time, why didn't the United States say that others should not hit it?
When it is your turn to face the risk, throw this strange appeal, the taste of the double-target is too thick.
Speaking of the real situation of China-U.S. relations, the Taiwan Sea and the South China Sea are now more sensitive places, and the United States often sends military ships and aircraft to those places to challenge, exacerbating regional tensions.
Minihan said that war may start in 2025. Although the Pentagon said this was a personal opinion, the United States has been strengthening its military deployment in the Asia-Pacific region in recent years and engaging in the so-called "anti-intervention system" confrontation. China is also improving its national defense capability to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Everyone knows that China and the United States are nuclear powers, and if they really fight together, the consequences are not playful, not only will the people of both countries suffer, but the global security and economy will suffer.
Let's talk about the remarks mentioned earlier. Although they were denied by the Pentagon, they also reflect that there are indeed some radical ideas within the U.S. military. Such remarks can easily mislead public opinion and make everyone feel that the Sino-US war is very close., exacerbating panic.
The Pentagon's response is actually a balance. It does not want to let radical internal remarks affect Sino-US relations, but also does not want to appear weak.
Netizens' hot remarks also show that everyone has clearly seen the double standards of the United States, and the ordinary people understand that there are no exceptions to war, and can not only allow the United States to take advantage.
The absurdity of this appeal by the US media is actually obvious, that is, putting one's own interests first, ignoring the basic logic of war and China's core interests.
They have forgotten that China has always been a peace-loving country, but peace does not rely on charity from others or compromise on one's own. If someone really imposes war on China, China will definitely fight back resolutely, protect its own people and territory, and will not be bound by such unreasonable appeals.
We have to be clear that the real risk does not come from China, but from the United States' constant provocation and double standards. If the United States really does not want to fight, it should stop its provocations in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, stop making these unreasonable remarks, and sit down and have an equal dialogue with China. This is the right way to maintain peace.
There is never a reason for only one side to punch in war, and peace is never achieved through unilateral compromise.
Everyone thinks that what is still hidden behind the U.S. discourse of the two sides that does not say exports? if China and the United States continue to fry on sensitive issues in the future, how can we better safeguard peace without losing our core interests?