Which side will your cunt be on in World War III?
We'll stand with you my American friend.
>>52355224
I don't care as long as we win
>>52355224
Those islans are righfull possession of the Austrian empire! China and America go home!
For the Kaiser und so weiter.
>>52355224
The one who genocides niggers and sandniggers
>China builds artificial islands and chases other navies into submission
>"China is right, rest of word rong"
>America and Australia fly near these islands
>"China is deeply concerned over this military provocation and we urge all parties to stay out of China's business"
Flawless Chinese foreign policy
>>52355224
We stand with Turkey
>>52355224
>Which side will your cunt be on in World War III?
All will be on the side of the dead after WWIII. So it doesn't matter which side they're on in WWIII.
>>52355224
Germany.
>>52355464
>For the Kaiser
Habsburgs aren't even allowed on Austrian soil.
>>52355551
if these were t*rk islands they would have shot the plane down
China and Poland vs USA and Russia
calling it now
>>52355827
>USA and Russia
How? I thought they are in bad terms as of late.
And doesn't Russia side with China more?
I never understood the whole Spratly Island dispute. Why are all the Asian countries fighting for a shithole in the middle of the sea? Oil?
>>52355963
China needs the islands because it doesn't have an aircraft carrier worth a shit. Obviously it's geopolitical strategy is to take to control of the South China Sea in order to expand their influence and fuck the yanks off.
>>52355600
Because we will stay out of it?
>>52355925
Trump and Putin
Neither.
In the South China Sea we only have obligations to Malaysia and Singapore. If the US and China get into a fight, we won't get involved.
>>52355643
stfu zieglböhm!
>>52356225
>If the US and China get into a fight, we won't get involved.
Don't put money on it old chap
>>52356262
Well there is precedent: we didn't get involved in the Vietnam War for example. We also refused to bomb Assad after the Americans asked as to do that with them.
Getting in a war against China when we don't have to, is counter to British interests, therefore it won't happen.
>>52356325
If China and USA tangle the whole world will be sucked into the conflict. The 2 largest economies in the world in direct conflict would have enormous knock on effects, most likely you'd end up having to defend the said countries in your image anyway.
>>52356435
Explain why Europe would get drawn into such a conflict? "American pressure" is no answer as that has been ignored several times in the past.
>>52355224
The pro-meme side
>>52355408
>Germans
>winning wars
>>52356507
See
>>52356225
Most likely some, if not all of those powers would be involved in the conflict, and once China is cornered who knows how they'll act out. It's a moot point really because the Chinese know they can't fuck with the Yanks anyway, at least not yet. They'll have to wait minimum 20-30 years before they could attempt to, and thats only if they continue to grow economically. China was probably the biggest meme of the century so far.
>>52356507
one of those countries would see the opportunity america vs china presents and would get themselves drawn into it on purpose
>>52356712
Malaysia sold itself for Chinese investments and Singapore is a non-claimant so Yurop won't be drawn in.
The winning one.
No one, we are irrelevant, although our stupid president "helped" you in Irak.
>>52355224
Naturally the glorious Russian Federation.
>>52356544
>there are 6.3 million jews in Israel
>there once also were 6 million jews in Germany
Be careful what you say
>>52356856
poor dogs
With US
..
I mean China
>>52357347
Let's make the Earth a nuclear wasteland again.
>>52356507
if china went to war with us you'd have to help
Whatever side benefits us the most
>>52356008
?
Hainan is like 300 miles away from the islands, and the Paracels (which are in China's EEZ) closer.
The reason is because everyone's doing a landgrab, and even unoficcial islands will get better terms in future negotiations.
>>52355582
no we dont, ahmed
>>52356599
>meme
Yeah because they aren't taking land and fucking our weak president as we speak.
>>52356856
That's the way the Indians see us when we slaughter cows.
What's the difference, really? The view that dogs are not for eating is something eurocentric. That doesn't make either us or them savages. Humans have used animals for thousands of years in any matter they saw fit and hopefully that will continue, because it benefits humankind. Food is a rather minor issue here. Farming is more efficient. But using animals especially in medical research has benefited the human species tremendously. And these animals don't suffer any less than the dogs in that webm who get a quick death by a powerful blow to the head. The same way we kill fish btw.
>>52356599
>Most likely some, if not all of those powers would be involved in the conflict
Sure and if they are, I'd be happy with Britain helping to defend them. But that doesn't make it a world war.
Remember a WORLD war implies war in EUROPE and the other major regions of the world. If war breaks out in the South China Sea why would there be war in EUROPE?
If European powers are fighting in the Far East, it's STILL a regional war.
>>52357500
>if china went to war with us you'd have to help
No we wouldn't. The only mutual defence treaty we have with the US is NATO, and that only covers the North Atlantic region.
>>52355224
We have no choice, as the 51st state, but to support our murrican overlords.
>>52357500
No they would not. Unless they attack our bases in Japan/Korea or our land chapter V is not invoked.
>>52357388
I thought most of them were in Poland though.
>>52357649
if you are saying you wouldn't help if us and australia was getting bombed i hope we would turn around after the south china sea and carpet bomb london tbqh
>>52357650
Good thing you guys are getting more and more irrelevant and keep fucking with SK.
>>52355224
the winning side ;)
>>52357630
t. Hans Chang
>>52356225
You'll do as you're told.
>>52357731
That's not how alliances work. They don't give a country freeride to attack shit and be supported.
>>52357789
>we would be the ones to attack china
WWI : Invaded, lost a lot, lot, lot of men
WWII : Invaded, humiliated
Fuck it, not again !
>>52357750
Why are you being rude m8? I am supporting you guys.
>>52357701
>Unless they attack our bases in Japan/Korea or our land chapter V is not invoked.
It's only invoked if the land or territory is north of the Tropic of Cancer and in the North Atlantic region (which includes the area around the Med. Sea).
When Argentina attacked British land in the SOUTH Atlantic, NATO did not apply, Article 5 did not apply.
>>52357731
>if you are saying you wouldn't help if us and australia was getting bombed
Read the thread you fucking idiot, we have an obligation to Australia >>52356225 but no obligation to the US in that region.
>>52357777
>You'll do as you're told.
You obviously haven't heard of Vietnam or the attempt to get Britain to join military strikes against Assad...
>>52357288
>best president of our democracy
>stupid
Shut up Pedro.
We will side with the NATO of course.
>>52357838
You weren't needed in Vietnam, where you were needed was in Europe in case the Soviets decided to start some shit.
>w-we said no to Syria
And now you're bombing Syria, like you were told to do.
>>52357838
>You obviously haven't heard of Vietnam or the attempt to get Britain to join military strikes against Assad...
reckon china is quite a different situation than those
>>52355224
The side which takes the refugees. But this time, we get Asians. Also, we are propably going to support China, since it is one of our biggest allies and most important trade partners.
>>52357909
>Also, we are propably going to support China,
>Germany supports china
>US soldiers march out of theri base
>German army points broomsticks at us
yea nah you'd get occupied in 48 hrs if you did that
>>52357901
That's fair to say, but it's israel calling the shots not us anyway.
>>52357968
They've been occupied for 60 years.
Why are the burgers so desperate to start a World War?
>>52357901
>You weren't needed in Vietnam
So why did the US put so much pressure on our Prime Minister to join that conflict?
>And now you're bombing Syria, like you were told to do.
The Paris attacks were the catalyst for British involvement there, and we're attacking ISIS not Assad.
>>52357903
>reckon china is quite a different situation than those
Just because you think so doesn't change the UK's treaty obligations or UK foreign policy which is trying to IMPROVE relations with China. You'd understand this better if you stepped back and looked at it from a non-American POV. For Britain, China is seen as a commercial opportunity, for the US it's seen as a threat which must be contained. The UK is trying to get China more integrated with the world, helping the Renminbi to get more important and spearheading western membership of its AIIB.
Pic related, unfavourable attitudes to China are about the same as they are to the USA.
>>52358062
Actually Chang, China building those islands is by far the biggest provocation/foreshadowing for WW3 there is. You guys have invaded their "airspace" as well.
>>52358079
It's a poll of British people if that wasn't clear
>>52358079
>So why did the US put so much pressure on our Prime Minister to join that conflict?
Legitimacy, literally no other reason. We wanted you to send 30 or 40 troops so it looked like our shenanigans had a wide coalition. You certainly weren't wanted for the fight.
>The Paris attacks were the catalyst for British involvement there, and we're attacking ISIS not Assad.
So in other words you're doing the exact same thing we're doing.
>>52358117
Why are you talking about commercial interests? China and our economies are intertwined the most. We can't even exist without each other at this point.
>>52357760
You guys eat fucking rats and rat tails as a delicacy. Not to mention whales and dolphins. Probably half the seafaring poachers in the world are flips.
>>52357810
China will just keep building and expanding then.
>>52357836
Because you didn't have to support us before Abe had his wetdream of the past.
>>52358146
>Legitimacy, literally no other reason.
I thought you said we weren't needed? Now you're saying we WERE needed for legitimacy. Make up your mind, retard.
>So in other words you're doing the exact same thing we're doing.
You said "you'll do as you're told", the US told us to join strikes against Assad and we didn't. You must be pretty thick if you don't understand how this contradicts your claim.
>>52358150
>Why are you talking about commercial interests?
Because it's relevant to the question of whether Britain would join a conflict against China. Yes the US has commercial ties with China, but the US also sees China as a threat to be contained. The UK does not see China like this. Are you really so stupid that you can't see the difference here?
>>52357838
Well agreed, but if China does not attack first then it would be even less likely and maybe then ANZUS wouldn't apply.
Or did New Zealand withdraw from the binding provision in the 70's?
>>52357858
Yeah the one who presided and partially caused Madrid, the 2008 crash, and all the corruption.
>>52358291
Nah but you're stupid enough to not see if US and China broke ties it would fuck the entire western economy into a depression that's been unseen in modern times.
And I'm also not stupid and see that you're a young kid with a student politic view of the US and would unironically prefer closer ties with China despite them being a more extreme version of the US in everything you hate about us.
>>52357388
Israel has 60 gorillion American paws.
>>52358150
Just as much as Germany and Britain 1914.
>>52358291
Needed was the wrong word, "preferred" is probably better.
>us told us to join airstrikes against Assad
The US Congress didn't even allow Obama to bomb Assad. I don't know where you get that you made some big act of defiance by voting against doing something the US government was against anyway.
>>52357388
Germans are gonna attack us with what? broomsticks?
Right one
>>52355224
China won't go to war over this, they're trying to test how far they can go. They can only win from this push. Neither sides want war, they're just trying to assert some dominance. They know a war will be devastating and eventually will back down if the US keeps pushing them, but not without some concessions as the US does not want war either, which ultimately will put China off in a better position.
>>52358298
It's complicated, New Zealand isn't fully part of ANZUS but they're in some parts of it.
I think it's best to see ANZUS as mostly two integrated alliances of Aus-NZ and Aus-USA.
USA-NZ relations are improving a bit, but they have no real obligations to each other.
>>52358379
I don't hate the US, but I do dislike the assumptions that the UK would get involved for no good reason, and it's annoying how people think NATO applies to the entire world.
I don't see what's wrong with closer ties with China. China would improve if it was more integrated with the global system. I don't like how the USA keeps the Chinese down in the World Bank and IMF, with far less influence than their economy would warrant.
>>52358428
>I don't know where you get that you made some big act of defiance by voting against doing something the US government was against anyway.
Except the Obama administration was FOR the military strikes until after the UK refused to get involved. The US asked for British involvement: you can't deny that. I'm not acting like it's some big "act of defiance", I'm using it as an example to show that the "you'll do as your told" attitude from some Americans in here is hilariously wrong. The US could boss us around in the 50s but not today.
>>52358653
>Except the Obama administration was FOR the military strikes until after the UK refused to get involved.
Who cares what he wanted? It wasn't his call.
>The US asked for British involvement: you can't deny that.
No, Obama did.
>>52358703
>Who cares what he wanted? It wasn't his call.
The President doesn't actually need any Congressional approval to order the US military around. As long as he doesn't want to declare war it's fine.
>Congress holds the power to declare war. As a result, the president cannot declare war without their approval. However, as the Commander in Chief of the armed forces, many presidents have sent troops to battle without an official war declaration (ex. Vietnam, Korea).
>No, Obama did.
Fine, the US President did. What's your point? Do you want other examples?
How the US told us not to join the AIIB and we did anyway?
What are you trying to prove exactly? Face the facts: the US can't order countries around any more.
>>52358653
>USA-NZ relations are improving a bit, but they have no real obligations to each other.
Thank goodness. About the one good thing Labour ever did.
>>52358913
>The President doesn't actually need any Congressional approval to order the US military around
He does if he wants money to do so. Congress has to fund his adventures, they refused to do so.
>AIIB
That was more of a warning that you probably shouldn't make it quite so easy for the Chinese to steal your cash. If you want to be that retarded no one is going to stop you.
>>52359005
It's partly to do with your policy on maintaining a nuclear-free zone in your waters
>After consultations with Australia and after negotiations with New Zealand broke down, the United States announced that it was suspending its treaty obligations to New Zealand until United States Navy ships were re-admitted to New Zealand ports, citing that New Zealand was "a friend, but not an ally".[17]
>>52359071
The US government made itself look weak in front of the world because it was worried about British taxpayers' money??
>>52357630
a dog is a human's best friend.
Sadly the non whites are not humans.
the loser side, whichever what we choose
>>52360373
>a dog is a human's best friend.
That's wrong. A human is a human's best friend. If you are on the verge of starving I will kill my dog to feed you.
>>52355224
The side without SJWs and cucks.
The best side, America
USA USA USA
>>52360373
You are in a weird world where some humans are worth less than a dog.
>>52356158
i'd pay to see trump elected, just because of this powerhouse duo of world class memelords
>>52355224
We stand with no one. Canada should have nukes.
To the USA i guess, our greatest ally (i think)
>>52355224
neutral party
when the barbarians have killed each other we will assert global dominance
>>52361090
Thanks but no thanks Ahmed. I'll take the dog hunting and get real food.
make money, not war
>>52366117
And what do you hunt in a Chinese megacity?
>>52364977
Everyone should have nukes
>>52366667
RARE FLAG
A
R
E
hey, Chinese man, can a guy make a good living in your contry with "white face jobs"? or whatever the fuck I am
I can also act, teach BJJ, some workout routines.
TOTALLY UNRELATED, I KNOW, SORRY. It's just impossible to find chinese ppl around.
>>52365063
Based.
>>52357777
Kek you wish Cody
>>52371081
well maybe u can teach football here,
it will be easier if you can speak some mandarin
>all these flags you thought were friends and allies saying they would help the chinese instead
>>52373318
If you're talking about me earlier I was saying we should stay out of it, not help the Chinese
>>52355224
Dunno m8 just nuke every single country lad haha great just nuke everyone and see what happenes m8
Neutral, as always
we don't like to die
>>52374502
Staying out of it is helping the chinese. You're not Swiss mountain Jews, it's time to reclaim Hong Kong my friend
>>52367075
Chinks obviously
>>52374840
Lel, if there's one country that would hate us having overseas colonies again more than China, it's the US. Maybe you wouldn't mind but US governments since forever hate that.
>>52375129
British colonies vs Chinese colonies, hmmm
>>52375194
That's not the choice (it could also be a city-state like Singapore), and it's not the reality either (HK ain't a colony)
we will help us and we already killed bunch of chinks in korean war
We'd obviously fight for the Americans, just like Vietnam, ww2 and ww1 (Britain). But im starting to see some treacherous shit going on in parliament, our leaders are favouring the chinks, hell they've even implemented a nanny like state similar to it, but with the added cultural Marxist American model. I honestly wouldn't know, but being in Asia makes us easy prey, especially if the American economy and/or society collapses, leaving us less dependant on their military presence, which means its open seasaon for Xi and the lads
I would support China desu
>Chinese send navy through Aleutians
>no fucks given
>americans send navy through artificial islands
>Best Korea tier threats
>>52357388
And now you've got 6 million Muslims, congratulations.
>>52357630
Dogs have been helping us hunt and guarding our homes for thousands of years. Cattle were domesticated specifically to be eaten. If you don't understand the difference, you're not very bright.
>>52361090
If my dog was starving I'd kill you to feed him desu.
>>52376319
Why would the Chinese even bother invading you? It's smarter just to leave you there as a resource shop, like Canada is to the USA, or Russia to China
>>52377052
So there we have it: the American is human's worst enemy
>>52377457
>German will kill you to make lampshade out of you
>"nope, American is human's worst enemy"
>>52356225
Why you have no obligations to Japan?
>>52357536
perfidious Anglo
>>52377855
You're confusing something. I'm the one willing to kill my dog to feed you. You're the one willing to kill me to feed your dog. My assertions stands.
>>52378263
>Why you have no obligations to Japan?
Our obligations to Malaysia, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand are due to Commonwealth links because they were part of the Empire.
When Britain was winding down the Empire, they asked us to keep a British military presence in the area, and we did so. Japan doesn't have that kind of link with the UK and Japan never asked Britain for anything like that.
>>52378263
>>52378915
Having said that, Japan is mentioned in the SDSR in quite a positive way. I think our government wants to improve our ties.
>>52378608
Yes, killing a human to feed your bro dog is more frivolous with human life than killing a human to make yourself a lampshade
>>52377082
good point. But its sort of like how the Japanese tried to invade during ww2, there plan would've been fucked up, but im sure many civilians would've died
>>52379599
You're confusing something. I'm the one willing to kill my dog to feed you. You're the one willing to kill me to feed your dog. My assertions stands.
>>52379879
Imperial Japan and China had/have pretty different mentalities
Japan was extremely insecure about its lack of resources and want to keep expanding in order to secure them. China has historically been quite happy to sit there and receive tribute from those it considers inferior. Its been a bit expansionist but not very.
I think Australia's biggest security risk from China is some sort of conflict in the South China Sea which fucks up your most important trading area and therefore harms your economy. Which is why Australia is investing in some basic power projection like those Canberra Class amphib. assault ships.
That's not the sort of thing you buy if you're expecting war to come to you, that's offensive capability
This is how retarded the situation is
>yfw China and Taiwan unite to claim the clay of the chinese empire
>>52355498
>The one who genocides niggers and sandniggers
>Switzerland
fucking based
>>52375600
No the USA BTFO chinks. You guys got BTFO by your Nork buddies.
>>52376507
Well the Bering Strait is international waters. And we were not "quiet" about it at all.
You can't call the Chinks hypocritical because they haven't violated any sovereign waters (6 mile zone).
>>52377855
That's a highschool history class meme.
There's no such thing as German holocaust skin lampshades.
>>52381639
Yes there is...I own one.
>>52380238
They built those because of Indonesia, in my view.
>>52355224
we're slowly being invaded by chinks particularly in the housing market
please save us yanky scum
>>52380342
They are both nationalist nations with revisionist history. Taiwan was a dictatorship until 95' and even today it's still pretty authoritarian.
Both have similar claims on territory. But you never hear Taiwan's claims mentioned in American media.
>>52381777
>please save us yanky scum
A-as soon as you stop bullying us
Soon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S06nIz4scvI
>>52376319
kek, you give yourself too much credit. China doesn't care about you or your tanking dollar or your failing mining industries
>>52381713
Pic? That's dank as fuck desu senpai.
>>52381813
only if you save us and no bully our failing economy
>>52381843
Pic related.
But your point stands.
>>52381909
Yeah, but the difference is that we don't operate with the delusion that we have any influence on world politics.
>>52381875
Our economies are growing about the same rate acthuallllllyyy
>>52381975
True
The 28 million Aussies act like anyone outside the movie theaters or internet cares about them.
Oddly enough all the money flowing out of China this year is fueling Western economies via the housing market.
>>52381993
I mean my country is very fucked right now because of oil dollar.
>>52381719
>They built those because of Indonesia, in my view.
I think it's Indonesia, China or whoever. If they have some power projection they can help allies in a conflict there and have a seat on the table after the conflict is resolved... well it makes sense. They're not strong enough to lead an allied effort though.
>>52382065
You think currency fluctuations affect the real economy?
This is the worst misconception of the year on 4chan.
Canada's dollar is just as down as New Zealand's and they don't export oil senpai.
Did everyone get used to a weak dollar since 2004?
>>52382132
Those ships are practically meaningless without planes in a great war. Effective patrol ships though. I guess ASW as well
>>52382055
>Oddly enough all the money flowing out of China this year is fueling Western economies via the housing market.
It's getting to be a serious problem here, don't know whether you've heard anything about it, but the Auckland housing market has just exploded from all the Zhangs in China and Canada buying up investment properties. It costs nearly a million dollars for an average 3 bedroom house in Auckland these days. And criticizing it makes you xenophobic in the eyes of the media even though it's retarded to put all your eggs in one basket.
>>52357630
Cows were domesticated as a source of food. Dogs were domesticated to be companions.
Comparing the two is a shit head thing to do. Fuck the Chinese, and anyone that abuses dogs.
>>52382206
The Canberra class? It's for amphibious assault m8. Meaningful in their role, by all accounts a decent ship, but obviously they will need cover from allied air power
>>52381777
You sent them to Seattle! Now we are being invaded :(
>>52355224
No idea. Probably just end up alone again against Russia like in Winter War.
>>52357630
Hello Zhao
>>52357630
>>52382403
>what's the difference between an animal that eats grass all day and an animal that will put himself in harm's way to save your life and your family's life
Dunno if autistic or just german.
>it's a pacific ocean international incident
>"it ain't me" starts playing
>>52382311
The anon you responded to said a great war.
In a full fledged no holds barred conflict with Chicom a single LHD wouldn't do shit.
According to the Pentagon and all the respectable think tanks, it would involve as much of the full might of America that it could put in Asian waters, Australia, Japan, SK, Guam and the Philippines .
It would be a WWII scale American mobilization just to get a marginal victory against China.
>>52355224
The side of freedom and democracy. Those who oppose us are probably communists or terrorists.
>>52376880
>>52382304
>>52382403
>>52383595
Genetic research suggests that domestication of dogs began in China.
The human digestive system can't even distinguish between proteins of plants and proteins of animals, let alone between different species of animals. And that is good. Humans are omnivores so as to maximize the chances of survival. This is how evolution shaped our species.
Your personal cultural bias as to which animals are acceptable for eating and which aren't makes you neither more moral nor superior. It's just your bias, coming from your upbringing.
>>52386804
>the only thing that matters is a thing's chemical composition and how our bodies react to it
Autism confirmed.
>>52386891
There's literally nothing inhumane or wrong about eating dogs if your culture has done it for a million years. It in no way infringes on human rights.
Currently in China it is banned outside of a small part of Southern China. Northern Chinese PETA types are trying to get it banned in Kunming (the main city for it.)
>>52386891
>regarding one's own cultural bias as the philosopher's stone
stupidity confirmed
Like Cold War: pretend that we kiss the ass of East but actually just try to stay out of shit.
Oh right can't do that anymore because of the EU bullshit and pussy leaders.
