Ubiecute/twink It's okay, bb. It's only the internet.
5d ago#7993497
Edited 5d ago
spent 0 currency on pings
President Donald Trump has incorrectly claimed China controls the canal (Panama controls it, although China owns ports on both sides of the crucial maritime passage). Trump has threatened to have the United States once again take control of the canal between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
What in the r-slurred journoslop does this mean? If you control both ports at either end of this canal, do you not control the canal?
>China can bar anyone from entering or leaving the canal, but they can't open or close the sections within the canal, so they actually don't control it.
SaveUsUncleTedRETVRN/MONKE
Ceterum censeo industrialis societatis esse delendam
Ubie 5d ago#7993534
spent 0 currency on pings
Chinks cant stop you from entering the canal (and probably not even from anchoring at the ports, just make it inconvenient I imagine). At most they can keep you from anchoring at the harbor.
Its like owning a house on both sides of the road doesnt mean i can stop anyone from driving on the street.
chine couldn't legally prevent american ships from passing through the canal. only physically. which is the only thing that matters in most scenarios in which china might wish to prevent american ships from passing through.
Its not a naval base, and if youre gonna counter "well they could hiiide the AShM" im gonna call you an r-slur since they can do that just as well in any port they dont own.
bibbobnotabotthey/them
Jesus loves all INCLUDING leftwingers and LGBT and minorities
Ubie 5d ago#7993864
spent 0 currency on pings
China can bar anyone from entering or leaving the canal, but they can't open or close the sections within the canal, so they actually don't control it.
by this account Denmark and Sweden should continue duking it out for control of the valuable Γresund.... have you magatards literally not progressed for a 17th century view of seafaring ? "MUH CHINKS GOT EM BALL CANNONS ON BOTHS SIDES"
its modern parlance, like when people say "unalived" instead of dead.
if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even among people who should and do know better. ~George Orwell
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
What in the r-slurred journoslop does this mean? If you control both ports at either end of this canal, do you not control the canal?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Chinks cant stop you from entering the canal (and probably not even from anchoring at the ports, just make it inconvenient I imagine). At most they can keep you from anchoring at the harbor.
Its like owning a house on both sides of the road doesnt mean i can stop anyone from driving on the street.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
chine couldn't legally prevent american ships from passing through the canal. only physically. which is the only thing that matters in most scenarios in which china might wish to prevent american ships from passing through.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
And how does owning the port change anything about it?
Better question, do you know what "owning a port" actually means?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's where they can refuel and stock up on supplies. What do you think ports do?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
If I were to emplace anti-ship missiles and air defense in my backyards on both ends of the street, I could sure try
Obviously China couldn't keep it closed in the long term, but they could make themselves a b-word to dig out
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
And owning those ports helps that... how?
Its not a naval base, and if youre gonna counter "well they could hiiide the AShM" im gonna call you an r-slur since they can do that just as well in any port they dont own.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Is that so?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
zoz
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
zle
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
zozzle
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
smartest chudpost
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
by this account Denmark and Sweden should continue duking it out for control of the valuable Γresund.... have you magatards literally not progressed for a 17th century view of seafaring ? "MUH CHINKS GOT EM BALL CANNONS ON BOTHS SIDES"
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Oh wow! I'd side with Sweden on that one because Danes can't fight.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
its modern parlance, like when people say "unalived" instead of dead.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Sounds like a Snopes fact check.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Todo pendejo
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context