×

Loading...
Ad by
Ad by

不懂就是不懂,别在那里装懂招摇撞骗做战争贩子。对今天Biden "reiterated that U.S. policy on Taiwan has not changed, and emphasized that

the United States continues to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo." 没有太多的余地去做歧义的解释。就是反对台独,维持现状,,避免冲突,保证和平。看链接,这是一以贯之的政策:

n December 2003 during his meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao at the White House, then U.S. President George Bush said that the United States opposed “any unilateral decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo.” Nearly two decades later, that message hasn’t changed.

Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下沙龙 / 谈天说地 / 不懂就是不懂,别在那里装懂招摇撞骗做战争贩子。对今天Biden "reiterated that U.S. policy on Taiwan has not changed, and emphasized that +4

    the United States continues to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo." 没有太多的余地去做歧义的解释。就是反对台独,维持现状,,避免冲突,保证和平。看链接,这是一以贯之的政策:

    n December 2003 during his meeting with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao at the White House, then U.S. President George Bush said that the United States opposed “any unilateral decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo.” Nearly two decades later, that message hasn’t changed.

    • 美国没有权力要求中国不得单方面改变现状。这是中国内政,是内战遗留问题,中国自然有权力在适当的时机统一。而美国要介入是没有任何国际法支持的。 +7
      • 中美的共识是维持现状,如果中国人武力侵犯台湾,美国人当然可以出面捍卫台湾,因为那就是一个“unilateral changes to the status quo”,但是老中不会,因为没有任何一点儿好处,还要挑起大战。现在要想改变现状的是台湾,所以拜登的这个态度是针对台湾的。
        • 我只是就法论法。美国没有任何正当权力对两岸指手画脚。当然美国向来喜欢用蛮力,那是另外一回事。真正让人忧虑的是美国在台湾重复了在乌克兰的勾当。所以你才会有台湾要搞台独的印象。我说过2024年美国可能会在台湾扶持一个泽伦斯基的人当总统。 +5
          • 扶一个台独总统,挺好。不过,扶不出来的。
      • 中共国什么时候对台湾拥有过主权? 联合国承认台湾是中共国的一部分吗?
        • 这不重要,重要是拳头够不够大。够大就是你的,不够大,是你的也会被抢走 +3
          • 如果俄国胜, 中共今年一定会攻打台湾, 习一直在等战局发展。普属龙, 习属蛇, 大龙小龙闹虎年。
            • 不会。统一台湾价值不大,成本很高,不过台湾独立危害很大。所以台湾不独,大陆不武。至少5年内会这样 +4
      • 土共没成立中华人民共和国之前确实是内战,成立之后就是国与国的战争
        • 就算是也不重要 +1
    • 面对我党和被我党洗脑的大陆人民,台湾领导人真该醒醒了。 +3
    • 政客说话你也信?这世界一定要说一套做一套,而且也一定是说一套做一套
    • 有不服气的,请拿出来比这里的这篇对status quo的解读更加权威的解读:

      The U.S. regarded neither the amendments nor dropping the claim to be the legitimate government of all of China to be changes in the status quo-or at least not changes that merited some statement of displeasure. After all, it would be a bit difficult to insist that the ROC should maintain its claim to legally govern all of China when the U.S. recognizes another in that role. But were the Taipei government to call the mainland-issued 1947 constitution null and void, drop the name Republic of China, and call itself something simple and descriptive like "Taiwan," the U.S. would likely denounce these actions as a most grievous unilateral change in the status quo. China would regard it as intensely provocative.

      Taiwan's two most recent presidents have frequently asserted that Taiwan is a state separate from China, sovereign and independent. But so long as this claim is not placed within a legal framework, Washington and Beijing have decided that, however galling, they can live with it.

      • 不用解读。打不过就忍着,打得过就抢,不用解读,不用理由。当然宣传上的理由就是各说各的,实际上不重要 +1
    • 台湾问题真是麻烦,要不这样,所有平民百姓出去旅游2周,让两边军队放开了打,谁打的过就是谁的呗。
      • 我不觉得台湾是什么大问题。两岸都是玩假的。大陆喊打,台湾喊独,喊喊而己,却没实质动作,安了
        • 你看到了蕩蕩沒看到的 +1
        • 谁都知道两边一直做样子,但到一定程度,比如实力的不平衡就该开战了。台湾是很想独立,但光靠自己远远没实力独立,所以就瞎吵吵。大陆很想收了台湾,但也没实力打的过美国而不是台湾。所以两边的顾忌不一样,论实力一个小孩儿一个成人的区别。
    • 什么是“status quo"就是按你被洗脑后的解读。status quo就是和平状态,没有战争。美国没有承认过台湾是中国的一部分。台湾如果”独立“,官方的用词一定是”改国号“。世界上除了中国人,common sense就是台湾是一个独立政权 +4
      • 我如果被洗脑,也是被美国人洗脑,你被谁我记不知道了:But were the Taipei government to call the mainland-issued 1947 constitution null +2
        and void, drop the name Republic of China, and call itself something simple and descriptive like "Taiwan," the U.S. would likely denounce these actions as a mo
        • 你写的这句话我google不到。不知道是从哪儿来的。美国当然不希望紧张,但美国也重来没有给台湾提供过军事保证。美国也不会说出什么“你绝对不能做这“的事情,而这事情是民主程序通过的 +3
          • 这里是解说文章的链接:
            The Bush Administration has often said it opposes attempts by either side-China or Taiwan-to alter the status quo in the Taiwan Strait area. This admonition, given by White House or State Department spokespersons, is almost always directed at statements from, or actions taken by, the government in Taipei. Apparently, China's yearly addition of 100 offensive missiles aimed at Taiwan, for a total now approaching 900, does not count as an alteration of the status quo.
            • 这文章是十几年前, +1
              当时中美关系还好的时候,中国担心陈水扁台独,美国说的偏向中方的话。但这文章底部说了两点。1。American law treats Taiwan as a state separate from the People's Republic of China. 2。it would be useful for the U.S. government, as it seeks to maintain the status quo "as we define it,"。美国的立场一直是这样的,不同时间点用词少许不同
              • the United States opposed “any unilateral decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo.” Nearly two decades later, that message hasn’t changed.
      • 不重要,只要不是国际承认的政权即可。也就是没有让外国驻军的权力,没有布置外国导弹防御系统的权力即可。其他的,大陆都是瞎囔囔
    • 你傻傻地只看到单边“台独”,而另一边“台统”,才是拜登所要警告中国的:U.S. officials have condemned the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) recent military activities around Taiwan as a challenge to the status quo +3
      How can the United States protect Taiwan’s people and way of life without turning Taiwan into a chess piece in the U.S.-China power game?
      • 你自己引用文章之前都不读一下?How can the United States support Taiwan’s democracy without encouraging Taiwanese independence, which will drag the United State into war with China?
        • 那与话题status quo 没有直接关系。你想打马虎眼还是不懂英文啊。status quo 在当前的语意是反对中国的“台统”行径,也是拜登所警告习近平的。除非你不懂英文。 +5
          • 美国人不愿意encourage 台湾独立正是因为那样就破坏了status quo,如何是没有关系? +1
            • 在狡辩已是人品问题了,如果不是英文问题的话。 话都写的这么明确了:U.S. officials have condemned the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) recent military activities around Taiwan as a challenge to the status quo +5
              • 把文章读完,仔细想想。再说话。我贴出来你自己引用的文章里面的语言质问你?和我人品有什么关系? +1
                • 请你翻译这句 U.S. officials have condemned the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) recent military activities around Taiwan as a challenge to the status quo +3
                  • 你先去把status quo 读懂再说吧。拜登在劝说习近平加入自己行列的会谈中特意批判中国破坏staus quo,就为了故意激怒对方? +1
                    • 现状台湾局势紧张话题是中国犯台问题还是台独问题?尼克松建立的智库,现在发话说的再明确不过了:U.S. officials have condemned the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) recent military activities around Taiwan as a challenge to the status quo。 +4
                      • 拜登在和习近平讲话中提到这个问题就是为了appease 习近平,通过修正自己前段时间失言说出的要武力捍卫台湾的说法,来换取习近平对联合打击普京的支持。你和别人谈判的时候会去故意刺痛别人的软肋挑起争端吗?台海现在最大的问题是台湾的独立诉求。你自己去想吧。 +1
                        • 狡辩臆想的可笑,又没有支持你臆想的证据。而相反的证据比比皆是,例如,拜登的国务卿最近是这样说的:“it would be a serious mistake for anyone to try to change that status quo by force”。这次会谈拜登警告习近平,是这样说的: +3

                          Biden also told Xi ‘that U.S. policy on Taiwan has not changed, and emphasized that the United States continues to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo.’

                          His warning to stay away from Taiwan came as China has upped its military presence in the region.

                          • 自己去读一下吧:President Joe Biden made clear Tuesday evening he was not encouraging Taiwan's "independence" after using the word +1
                            President Joe Biden made clear Tuesday evening he was not encouraging Taiwan's "independence" after using the word an hour earlier to describe the progress he made during a discussion of the island with his Chinese counterpart Monday evening.
                            • 你网上胡乱搜索一个过去的Taiwan's "independence"话题,毫无意义,因为与话语 status quo无联系,请去看看这次谈 status quo和最近历次谈维持现状 status quo,都是指中国犯台。 +1
                              • 虽然你英语好,
                                还是替你找一段status quo的 解释:the existing state of affairs, especially regarding social or political issues。 两岸三方的existing state 是什么。就是现在这个样子,也就是五十年来的这个样子。台独要打破这个平衡,所以美国人要一再强调status quo。
                                • 奉陪你 (#14451812@0)
                                  • “President Biden made clear that we remain opposed to any unilateral changes to the status quo across the Taiwan Strait,'
                                    the senior administration official said.你自己去理解”any“的意思吧。台海有几十个冲突方?台海的变数除了台独和武统,还有什么是美国人要关心的也应该关心的?
          • 我当然不懂英文。这是你的辩护文章里的话:Is the United States ditching its decades-old commitment to “one China” at the risk of a military confrontation with China?
            • 那与话题无关。请你翻译这句 U.S. officials have condemned the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) recent military activities around Taiwan as a challenge to the status quo。status quo不是你想象的只是反 “台独” +4
              • 跟老荡辩论会被气死的,所谓的粉红挠死人😄 +4
              • 中国只要不武统台湾,就不是“unilateral changes to status quo”。台湾只要宣布独立,就是。自己去读吧 +1
                • 看来你的思维逻辑也有问题,“维持现状”,虽然包括“不台独”,但不止是包括“不台独”,还包括其它如“不台统”等等多个内容,而最近美国政府和拜登说 oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo 是警告中国的“台统”的动作。 +3
                  • 我从来就没有否认过status quo包含了反对大陆武统的态度。 +1
                    • 美国总统尼克松建立的智库现在是这样说的:U.S. officials have condemned the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) recent military activities around Taiwan as a challenge to the status quo。 +4
                  • 我都不知道为什么你们那么在乎美国说什么。美国在乌克兰上说的话不都和放屁一样吗?所以,美国说啥不重要,重要的是中国手上有多少筹码,愿意付出多少代价,这才是问题。
                    • 台海的规矩是美国人定的,也是美国人来维持的。
                      • 是啊,是因为美国的实力,不是因为美国说了什么。所以只需要观测中美的实力变化,不用管他说了什么。我看,在台海上,美国说的话离放屁也不远了。
    • 美国“官媒”美国之音不得不出来反击中共假消息。标题:“拜习第二次视频会,美中表述再次不同”;小标题:“关于台湾,美国没说“不支持‘台独’””。败登手下也有看透了中国的小动作,把话早说清楚
      拜登总统星期五(3月18日)与中国国家主席习近平进行长达近两个小时视频对话。对话主要围绕两个主题进行:乌克兰和台湾。白宫官员说,两位领导人进行了非常“坦诚的、实质性的对话,涉及了很多的细节问题。 不过,会后美中两国发出的通稿再次显示,两国对会谈的表述一如对去年11月的第一次视频会谈,不太一样。
      • 你喝醉酒了?还是你压根就不读你自己引用的文章:这位官员说,关于台湾,美国仍坚持基于《台湾关系法》、三个联合公报和六项保证为指导的“一个中国政策”。美方强烈反对单方改变台海现状的行为。 这位白宫官员再次提醒说,
        拜登总统当参议员时曾投票支持《台湾关系法》因此也会坚持《台湾关系法》的原则。
        • 台、独、两个字,我没看见,你脑补的不算
        • 这就和中国反对侵略,但就不说俄罗斯侵略一样。一个中国,台湾关系法,想用哪个的时候就用哪个,这些话,都是屁话
    • 只要台湾还有钱买军火,美国不会支持台独的。两岸开战,美国就只能送军火了,美国人这笔账还是清楚的。 +1
    • 都是廉价的文字游戏 +1
      • 这种话说了就说了我,没人会信。
      • 老荡不愧他的文科博士学位,把个文字游戏当个正儿八经的金科玉律来讨论,好像美国人说了就会执行似的。真执行的话,一会儿一个中国,一会儿台湾关系法,那就神经病了。人家是玩你的,不是被你玩的,老荡就是自己送上去给人家玩的。 +1
        • 虽然是文字游戏,但是两岸五十年无战事,也全靠了这一段文字。
          • 根本不是,靠的是美国实力远超中国。美国就是哑巴一个,一样的两岸僵持。下面的五到十年,很可能不一样了
        • 这种场合,能说出来的都是场面话,真正的讨价还价是不会说出来的。