China’s foreign minister said Saturday that Israel has gone too far in responding to last week’s invasion by Hamas, China’s official news agency reported.

Speaking to Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Israel’s actions have extended beyond self-defense.

According to Xinhua, China has an interest in helping resolve the conflict and the underlying issues involving the Palestinian population.

  • Joncash2
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Like I said, china was backwards in many things at that time. The reason all their weapons were Soviet was because they didn’t know how to even begin to make their own. The Chinese story is one of coming from nothing in the 80s and 90s to becoming a super power in the 20s.

    So yeah, their military definitely didn’t meet the gold standard at that time.

    What about it.

    And thus, again, why China just says fuck you. There’s no reason to let anyone know where in advancement stages china was in.

    • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Dude do you understand how unhinged you sound claiming china has no idea what basic crime investigation is?

      Thats like saying they were still using horse drawn carriages. Or didnt have shoes.

      • Joncash2
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Wow, such an American thing to say. Hey the world isn’t America, we don’t all have gun violence problems. It shouldn’t be surprising that China didn’t invest in ballistic forensics as much as America did. But to YOU, not having good ballistic forensics is the same as having no idea about basic crime investigation.

        Hey, here’s another secret, crime existed before guns. Crime investigation existed before guns. Not all countries had psychopaths like the US toting guns and shooting everyone that ballistic forensics became important.

        Jesus, you sound ignorant of the real world.

        • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          It was an international standard set in 1933 by a conference in europe, which the majority of the world participated in. Its not magically uniquely american, other nations also know what forensic science is.

          Hey look, I get youve dug such a deep hole that you need to pretend that america is the only country who can investigate crimes in order to not admit you lied about the terrorist thing. But you sound like an idiot pretending china was some undeveloped proto nation.

          • Joncash2
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Ah yes Europe, the Asianest of continents. Wait no it’s not. One of the problems China had was that the west wasn’t sharing all the data with them. It’s cute again that the west thinks they’re the international world. But guess what, Asia never felt that way. It’s literally one of the dividing issues. Again, so ignorant.

            *Edit: Also it’s important to note that I’m not saying China couldn’t match a barrel to a gun. I’m saying China didn’t have this magical database that could let it identify to the manufacturer. It simply wasn’t important to China at the time to match to manufacturer. If they found the murder weapon it was enough for them to identify the murderer.

            *Edit 2: Wait in 1933 was just the standardization of how to identify barrel to gun. There was no database at that time. You’re just makin stuff up to trick me. WHEN DID THIS MAGICAL DATABASE EXIST!?

            • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              China was involved in the conference, so I dont think they felt left out of the party they were present at. Manufacturer identification is older than barrel id. Barrel id is matching a specific bullet to a specific gun.

              … Every country makes its own database, honey. There isnt a single database. This isnt a video game, its the real world.

              • Joncash2
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                … Every country makes its own database, honey. There isnt a single database.

                Bingo and as I said over and over China didn’t invest a lot into this. So they didn’t have the data to trace. It’s not rocket science.

                *Edit: Also, it’s not like I said they couldn’t trace anything. I said they could trace to type at the time, but not as detailed as manufacturer. You’d need enough data to do that and they didn’t think it was important to collect to that level.

                • wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  They went to a conference in 1933 to directly invest in this, so I think they knew it just fine.

                  You seem to think manufacturer id is harder than gun barrel id. Manufacturer id is very easy, thats what was pioneered in the 20s.

                  If china could do barrel id (which they could, like everyone else) they could do manufacturer id.

                  • Joncash2
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    If they had the gun. Which they don’t. I’ve also said that again and again. They needed the gun to match the barrel and bullet.

                    *Edit: Matching to barrel is also different than matching to type. They only kept enough to match to type unless they had the gun in question.