Miscellaneous News

[hashtagpls]

Don't be daft. China benefits from STABILITY. A destabilized US would be terrible for China and for the world.

I dunno about you but the events of the past year have proven that a destabilised US lacks credibility in its attacks on China-which is great for China, needless to say.
All China needs to do now if it really wanted to twist the knife is to arm and train militia groups in the US, be it the NFAC or the plethora of white supremacist anti government groups; there are so many far right christian fundamentalist militant groups in the US, all it takes is a few well positioned pressure amplifiers and the whole rotten edifice comes crashing down.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Tam]

Aw geez. 2020 is not over yet.

We have a new strand of coronavirus detected in Denmark.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This can get bad.

 

[siegecrossbow]

Could be related to this:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This will have significant geopolitical complications for China.

If legit then it looks like Putin is trying to pull a "Shinzo Abe" since things aren't gonna work out well for Russia when the Democrats, who have a huge hate boner against Russia, are going to be in charge.

 

[solarz]

I dunno about you but the events of the past year have proven that a destabilised US lacks credibility in its attacks on China-which is great for China, needless to say.
All China needs to do now if it really wanted to twist the knife is to arm and train militia groups in the US, be it the NFAC or the plethora of white supremacist anti government groups; there are so many far right christian fundamentalist militant groups in the US, all it takes is a few well positioned pressure amplifiers and the whole rotten edifice comes crashing down.

And then what? Is the US nuclear arsenal going to magically disappear? Are its overseas bases going to magically shut down? Do you really think a destabilized US is not going to become desperate enough to start employing its military?

Ever have a huge tree growing in your backyard? Guess what happens when it comes crashing down? Your house is going to get smashed. If you want to remove it, you need to do it piece by piece. A destabilized US, and by that I mean something far worse than what we have right now, is going to be like a falling tree due to the sheer size of its influence.

Sun Tzu said, "don't chase a desperate enemy". On a strategic level, that means don't push your enemy into doing something desperate.

 

[Bob Smith]

And then what? Is the US nuclear arsenal going to magically disappear? Are its overseas bases going to magically shut down? Do you really think a destabilized US is not going to become desperate enough to start employing its military?

Ever have a huge tree growing in your backyard? Guess what happens when it comes crashing down? Your house is going to get smashed. If you want to remove it, you need to do it piece by piece. A destabilized US, and by that I mean something far worse than what we have right now, is going to be like a falling tree due to the sheer size of its influence.

Sun Tzu said, "don't chase a desperate enemy". On a strategic level, that means don't push your enemy into doing something desperate.

The Soviet Union had an even bigger nuclear arsenal and America willingly pushed it to collapse. The Soviet Union balkanized and a war never erupted between the Soviets and America.

Why do you think a destabilized America will start a fight with China instead of fighting a civil war between red and blue states especially when Trump followers think Democrats rigged this election.

 

[solarz]

The Soviet Union had an even bigger nuclear arsenal and America willingly pushed it to collapse. The Soviet Union balkanized and a war never erupted between the Soviets and America.

Why do you think a destabilized America will start a fight with China instead of fighting a civil war between red and blue states especially when Trump followers think Democrats rigged this election.

Because the Soviets never had the kind of foot print the US currently has? Because by the end of the Cold War, the US was holding a commanding military advantage on all fronts? What do you think NATO was for?

Why do I think a destabilized US will start a fight with China? Because, as other posters have mentioned previously, the only thing that will unify the Left and the Right is a fight with China.

 

[Bob Smith]

Because the Soviets never had the kind of foot print the US currently has? Because by the end of the Cold War, the US was holding a commanding military advantage on all fronts? What do you think NATO was for?

Why do I think a destabilized US will start a fight with China? Because, as other posters have mentioned previously, the only thing that will unify the Left and the Right is a fight with China.

Do you think the US started destabilizing efforts in 1991 and the Soviet Union collapsed immediately? It took decades and was the most obvious in the Afghan Soviet war when they armed the Mujahadeen. Why didn't the Soviet Union ever directly attack the states when they knew America was covertly messing with them for decades? War with America could have brought the Soviet people closer together like you're saying would happen in an American war with China for the American people.

In an age of nuclear weapons, America and their people live too much of a privileged life to risk going to war with a near peer competitor.

 

[solarz]

Do you think the US started destabilizing efforts in 1991 and the Soviet Union collapsed immediately? It took decades and was the most obvious in the Afghan Soviet war when they armed the Mujahadeen. Why didn't the Soviet Union ever directly attack the states when they knew America was covertly messing with them for decades? War with America could have brought the Soviet people closer together like you're saying would happen in an American war with China for the American people.

In an age of nuclear weapons, America and their people live too much of a privileged life to risk going to war with a near peer competitor.

So you're basically banking on the hope that China's destabilization efforts will not work that well and the US will have the time to decline gracefully before it completely collapses?

In that case, why destabilize the US at all then? If you're going to hope for a graceful US decline anyway, why do these things that will create untold amounts of suffering to ordinary Americans? Just because the US did it? Are you saying China should be no better than the Western Imperialists?

Or do you believe that if China does not try to actively destabilize the US, it cannot beat the US in the economic and technological race?

 

[Bob Smith]

So you're basically banking on the hope that China's destabilization efforts will not work that well and the US will have the time to decline gracefully before it completely collapses?

In that case, why destabilize the US at all then? If you're going to hope for a graceful US decline anyway, why do these things that will create untold amounts of suffering to ordinary Americans? Just because the US did it? Are you saying China should be no better than the Western Imperialists?

Or do you believe that if China does not try to actively destabilize the US, it cannot beat the US in the economic and technological race?

I'm saying Chinese destabilization efforts would speed up American decline which would aid China because at this point, the relationship between China and America is zero sum. Also, why should Chinese leaders care about American people? No leader of a great power cares about the suffering of their competitor and you shouldn't expect the same from China. I don't know why you're bringing morality into this.

I do think China will be able to beat America in the long run without destabilization efforts but it's better if they fall apart faster.