Yeah, I got that. But the other poster didn’t. I can understand the confusion.
In context…
Nothing Drew wrote stated anything directly about the article. It was about Drew’s opinion of the content of the article.
”It” is referring to what in his paragraph? It would be China taking over Taiwan.
Probably wiser / clearer to have separated that final sentence and added ”the article” instead of just a vague “it“.
Jesus
Where?
Is he back already?
Probably not, but the article was written for people who most likely don’t even know about the existence of the offshore islands, not the readers of Forumosa.
Just stick to the article.
I guess my own main beef is that that Guardian took a story that’s be done a million times, Kinmen and China, and ends it with a quote from some nobody that unification is inevitable.
Traveling all the way here in a pandemic just to end a story like that?
Yes, telling people who know nothing about Taiwan that
"Unification is a matter of time”
If you had to write about Taiwan in the middle of a pandemic, is this how to end it? by telling everyone that it’s inevitable so there’s no reason to even try…
I really hate the Guardian now. That article reads like pro China propaganda.
You seen to be reacting rather strongly to something that’s clearly a quote from someone and not the position of the author of the article, presenting that quote out of context, and misrepresenting that as the guardian telling people that reunification is inevitable. Talk about propaganda. 
I think it’s fairly obvious what “it” referred to, but once more for clarity’s sake (and also so others aren’t putting words in my mouth): Someone said they had a problem with the article ending with that quote. I don’t see an issue with ending it that way.
Obviously China taking over Taiwan would be an unprecedented tragedy for the world, the people who live here, democracy in this region of the world, and personally speaking for my family, etc. I can’t believe I even have to clarify this. So yeah I would have a big issue with that. Obviously.
Actually I don’t think it was that obvious. When I read it I also thought that the way it was written it sounded like you were OK with China invading us. I knew you had to mean something else, like that the article was OK, but it did sound the way I say.
Yeah but your Englishes are well dodgy
very funny.
Even if I’m some crazy CCP plant then I would probably talk about how unification is glorious and a bunch of other fiery rhetoric. No one would casually and offhandedly say “I don’t have an issue with it” about something huge like China invading the country where one lives. I understand some people here are a bit slow when it comes to figuring out meaning from context, but that’s just ridiculous.
Yeah, I know. That’s what I was going to say, the context helps to understand what you meant, but the way your wrote it doesn’t. As mentioned above, that IT could perfectly refer to the previous sentence.
And your mom is dodgy too.
I agree. No one has a crystal ball. But there are intelligence firms and political scientists that regularly make predictions about what country will either face destabilization or split in 10 to 50+ years due to circumstances.
It’s a double post. Does the editorial function understand that?
That’s a quote from someone who has lived there all his life. I suppose they should put in a quote from some random non-resident forbalance.
its are hard, i’ve found myself changing a lot of its in quick edits lately. that is one word where the writer really knows what they mean but the reader can see a lot choices. we should all take greater care with our its.
That’s how writing and editing works. Opinions of the author being attributed to other people. Some mysterious old guy who won’t be named.
He probably exists and probably said that, but the author has given him last word on the story. What does it say about Taiwan and it’s people…that they’re not worth helping because they refuse to help themselves.
My mum just celebrated her 80th.
The fact she thought it was her 40th is neither here nor there. Bless.