Fair enough. If no evidence means no need for an accusation based on suspicion alone, then I guess all hidden acts leading to destruction must be assumed to be nothing more than unfortunate accidents. Poor China and it's self-collapsing mine shafts. I guess they're just bad at infrastructure and unlucky. I'll file this event in the same category as China's ASML EUV lithography machine that was under construction during Trump term 1 and spontaneously self-destructed with definitely and absolutely no human intervention at all, at just around the same time as when the US openly declared China was not allowed to have such nice things, ever. Adversaries of the West sure seem to wind up having a lot of accidents with strategic implications. Just bad luck I guess.
It's all good. I'll learn from the best (GulfLander) and instead mass crosspost X tweets from half-baked Indian wannabe grandmaster strategists, MAGA anti-China hedge fund types that lost tons of money shorting China and clearly have a grudge over it, and wannabe Gordon Chang types trying to steal his market share. Well, I won't do that, but the constructiveness and quality of the vast majority of posts here is already extremely doubtful and I'm not sure a few speculations here and there are really pushing the needle anywhere. It's also pretty iffy to imply that large scale reposting of other people's lies from social media are much more helpful than speculating on possible facts that, while not having publicly available evidence yet, definitely track very closely with a pattern of conduct by Western state instruments of power across hundreds of years.
You have 5000+ posts in the space of 1.5 years and almost all of it is crossposting of types of people not very much different from Kyle Bass, Gordon Chang, Peter Zeihan, Jordan Peterson, and a whole host of wannabes much less famous than them. Mostly (but not entirely) posting just lies, intentional misinterpretation, and even outright propaganda. Basically mostly just acting as an echo chamber for lies and propaganda. I have only 2000 posts across more than 6.5 years and almost none of it is outright speculation with no publicly available evidence. Not to mention on the very rare occasion I do speculate, the pattern of conduct of any referenced entity tracks really closely with their historical pattern anyways so it's not like your crossposted content of malicious actors clamoring for the ten-thousandth time that China is finished and that their X, Y, Z has suffered total annihilation due to an American masterstroke in policy. Or that they should surrender or face total annihilation. How many times do these peanut gallery types have to demonstrate they are clearly wrong and malicious before you choose to write them off instead of crosspost them like authorities on subject matter? Yeah, very constructive and productive content.
