If you didn't mean that they're part of five eyes, then you may want to remove the "which they're part of" portion of what you wrote. No reason to get heated over a misunderstanding.
How can this be understand in ANY OTHER WAY than, they're a part of the Five Eyes.
i understand that you think they should cease ties with it, and they can cease the relations they have, but the relation they have is NOT the one of a member.
Japan was either a member (a part of) the five eyes group, or it wasn't. Only two choices.
You seem to prevaricating on this.
No one is questioning whether Japan had ties to United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
No one is questioning (or agreeing with, for that matter) your assertion that this might be a good opportunity for Japan to cease ties with these nations.
No one questioning whether Japan works or doesn't work with these nations.
Everyone is questioning why you directly wrote that Japan is a part of the Five Eyes, when they aren't.
It may not be what you intended to write, it may not be what you intended to communicate, but there is no other grammatical way to interpret what you wrote other than saying that Japan is a part of the Five Eyes.
to cease ties with Five Eyes, which they're part of,
You can choose to either edit and correct or augment what you wrote or you can choose not to. Only two choices.
But seriously, if it was just me, you might have reasonable room to tell yourself, "he's just a nut. He cannot read. What I wrote was clear and well articulated." But it's not just me.
Receive the feedback, reflect and learn, or do not. Only two choices.
Either way, have a nice day!
Question: and I mean this without prejudice: Are you perhaps not a native speaker of English? If this is the case, it would explain a lot.
CEASE TIES with five eyes.
They have ties with five eyes.
this is not the point, the point is they're not a part of it, and you said they were.
Whatever you're dreaming is not what I meant. Which came from my brain not yours.
I meant 'cease ties'.
Ok? Accept? Or go around and talk nonsense for a few hours?
If you didn't mean that they're part of five eyes, then you may want to remove the "which they're part of" portion of what you wrote. No reason to get heated over a misunderstanding.
I write it again. Cease from five eyes.
Cease means cease.
How can this be understand in ANY OTHER WAY than, they're a part of the Five Eyes.
i understand that you think they should cease ties with it, and they can cease the relations they have, but the relation they have is NOT the one of a member.
Part of the group.
Cease being part of the group.
Are they in five eyes? Nope.
I think we're seeing where the 'dive' and 'bait' comes from... .
No seriously. D&B has a wedge in his/her noodle, and cannot unstick it.
It's pretty hard to grasp what D&B means when he says Japan is a part of the group (five eyes) but they are not a part of 'five eyes'. ??????
moving on....
Yeah, so who is a part of what in the sentence:"opportunity for Japan to cease ties with Five Eyes, which they're part of"?
thanks.
Either japan work or don't work with the five eye countries. Only two choices.
lol.
Japan was either a member (a part of) the five eyes group, or it wasn't. Only two choices.
You seem to prevaricating on this.
No one is questioning whether Japan had ties to United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
No one is questioning (or agreeing with, for that matter) your assertion that this might be a good opportunity for Japan to cease ties with these nations.
No one questioning whether Japan works or doesn't work with these nations.
Everyone is questioning why you directly wrote that Japan is a part of the Five Eyes, when they aren't.
It may not be what you intended to write, it may not be what you intended to communicate, but there is no other grammatical way to interpret what you wrote other than saying that Japan is a part of the Five Eyes.
to cease ties with Five Eyes, which they're part of,
You can choose to either edit and correct or augment what you wrote or you can choose not to. Only two choices.
But seriously, if it was just me, you might have reasonable room to tell yourself, "he's just a nut. He cannot read. What I wrote was clear and well articulated." But it's not just me.
Receive the feedback, reflect and learn, or do not. Only two choices.
Either way, have a nice day!
Question: and I mean this without prejudice: Are you perhaps not a native speaker of English? If this is the case, it would explain a lot.
So you're saying they didn't support Ukraine?