Miscellaneous News

horse

Colonel
Registered Member
I stopped taking the article seriously when he classified BRICS as a Chinese organization. It's like these people don't get it, his mentality and recommendations is why BRICS is a thing in the first place. People are tired of a western centric world order and want alternatives.

Actually, I am glad you brought it up, as there were two things in it that caught my attention, that I thought it was noteworthy enough to post.

It was just two paragraphs. It was an atypical kind of rant from people with that ideology, then there was this paragraph in the middle of the article, that really caught my attention.

However, many of these BRICS countries want economic benefits but no part of the fierce U.S.-Sino rivalry, thinking they can still rely on American security. They cannot be allowed to have it both ways.

I think there is a minor point here and a major point.

The minor point is just a practical consideration, such as what if the smaller country rejects the carrot and the stick? This has happened before, when UAE decided to keep its Huawei gear in their network, and cancel their F-35 contract. They did not officially cancel it, they suspended it. Then next, they bought Rafale.

The big thing I got out of it, was this is frustration setting in. Giving ultimatums, that is surely a sign of someone reaching the end of their rope. Look at the recent news, where US Republicans wants more sanctions on Huawei and SMIC (because they succeed), and they want the company executives arrested. Being how funny that is, we miss how frustrated they are.

The point is, frustrated people do things. Uncle Valdimir waited 8 years and finally out of frustration the tanks rolled after speaking to his friend at the Beijing Winter Olympics.

So, obviously further and more dramatic escalations are expected very soon. By both sides.

In short, America and China will continue battling it out on the economic, security, and geopolitical fronts. And BRICS is a significant threat that needs a comprehensive answer from the West.

This is the last paragraph in the article, which confirms that they do not like the direction things are presently going, which means their current plan is not working.

However, this is rather complicated thing I believe.

It is like a sports game, where there is a favourite and and underdog. Clearly I would say, China is the underdog and USA is the favourite. The the game starts and the underdog takes the lead.

The favourite thinks they can comeback, because they are a better team, but that is why you play the game.

The favourite can have that mentality, that they can coast, they finally turn it on, and take the game.

Too many in America has this attitude.

They think, they can be behind, but they are not in trouble yet, and when they turn it on, they will comeback and win.

That last paragraph, he was saying, and I suspect he fully believed it, that America is not in trouble yet, but should have some urgency in turning it on.

However, other than suggesting the USA threaten others with ultimatums and arrest, he had no other ideas.

Kind of ironic. The author knew they could be behind, sense that they could be in trouble if they do not turn it around, but in the end he demanded someone in the West comes up with a "comprehensive answer."

Well, geez, the guy wrote an article this long, he must have thought about it, and in the end, he does not even venture to suggest what a "comprehensive answer," from the West would look like.

For all their bravado, they're still losing.

They do not believe they are in trouble yet, but I think they are.

When there is no plan to change the course of the game, they will be in trouble sooner or later.

:D


:rolleyes::p

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:D
 
Last edited:

ficker22

Senior Member
Registered Member
With the usual caveats of veracity, I am ABSOLUTELY NOT OK with the trampling of constitutional rights under the guise of sanctions. None of these sanctions were voted by the parliaments and none are challangable in court. Even if these were actual laws, there is absolutely no point in the confiscation of private property on an ethnic basis. I really hate WW2 analogies but you know when this was also happening? Before the Holocaust.

Hahaha, this 'but 0.00000001% of our true power
 

Attachments

  • IMG-20230915-WA0002.jpg
    IMG-20230915-WA0002.jpg
    138.8 KB · Views: 36
  • IMG_20230915_135528.jpg
    IMG_20230915_135528.jpg
    141.5 KB · Views: 36

Stierlitz

Junior Member
Registered Member
Greasy haired Argentinian continues to bark. Polls predict he will win the 2nd round convincingly.

“Not only am I not going to do business with China, I am not going to do business with any communists. I am a defender of freedom, peace and democracy. The communists don’t go there. The Chinese don’t go in there. Putin doesn’t go in there. Lula doesn’t go in there. We want to be the moral lighthouse of the continent. We want to be defenders of freedom, democracy, diversity. Of peace,” stated the national deputy.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That is why admitting Argentina into BRICS was a dumb move. Should have waited for the outcome of the election to be determined.
 
Last edited:

BoraTas

Major
Registered Member
My old comments about a possible Mexico expedition aged too well for my comfort. I saw a lot of Republican politicians writing about it and getting a lot of engagement. Big name media and politicians capitalized further on the topic and bingo. Half of the Americans now support such a thing in less than two years.


These cartels and even the Mexican state can not harm the US military meaningfully. The US got quite good at remaining in places despite armed hostility and dispatching small militaries.

Other than that this thing would be a dumpster fire. If the US actually wants to end the cartel problem, it has to really occupy the country. I mean soldiers on even obscure rural roads similar to post WW2 occupations. Just taking the cities and occasional patrols to the countryside is never enough for killing insurgencies. And Mexico is bigger than Afghanistan, both by population and landmass. Such an occupation would be horribly expensive, or just a bit less expensive and ineffective.

Moreover, these cartels have a lot of collaborators and presence in the US, including in the politics. It is how they can make billions in the first place. And a lot of latinos in the US still have ties to Mexico including family members. Riots, assassinations, infrastructure sabotages and attacks to police stations would go non-stop.

Not enough? These two countries have a long border. What does that mean? Refugees. Cartel members will cross as refugees and commit terrorist acts on top of usual problems associated with mass refugee flows.
 

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Greasy haired Argentinian continues to bark. Polls predict he will win the 2nd round convincingly.

“Not only am I not going to do business with China, I am not going to do business with any communists. I am a defender of freedom, peace and democracy. The communists don’t go there. The Chinese don’t go in there. Putin doesn’t go in there. Lula doesn’t go in there. We want to be the moral lighthouse of the continent. We want to be defenders of freedom, democracy, diversity. Of peace,” stated the national deputy.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That is why admitting Argentina into BRICS was a dumb move. Should have waited for the outcome of the election to be determined.
Statement straight out of the CIA's playbook

Another successful CIA operation
 
Top