Miscellaneous News

[timepass]

That's the whole point.

China offers a better deal.

Full stop. Unless the Americans can somehow offer a better deal, then the current situation will persist into future, diminishing American influence a little bit more each year as we go along.

As we can see currently, the Americans have no capacity to offer a better deal, so it resorts to coercion to its allies and negative campaigning against China (stories of fake genocide).

Just my opinion but this does not have a chance.

The stories of fake genocide, does that stop America from doing business with the Chinese?

Yes? No?

Why would anyone else be any different?

Unless we think Australia or corrupt UK politicians are the center of the world.

Someone is being played. It ain't the Chinese.

A .... BIG .... difference is the trust level where US dented their friends & allies .... Perfect example is Pakistan .... our pervious establishments & governments did whatever being asked to do despite at sake of the nation collapse but what we got is .... we labelled Terrorist Sponsor Country .....

If you ask to a layman in Pakistan about his/her idea about the trusted partner US/China for Pakistan, people will blindly vote for China ..... So, questions arises WHY ...... answer is US spend all the money on corrupt leaders/Establishment for the full filling their goals rather to invest on the ground for the betterment of the locals which was actually projected ..... while China invested on ground & now is in the position to dictate his terms as whole Pakistan nation believes that they are true friends, which they are .....

Same they did in Afghanistan, if the amount which they burned to kill the Taliban by feeding to puppet govt/warlords was spend for the betterment of Afghani people the situation in Afghanistan was entirely different ....

 

[timepass]

Just ranting here, but this Freedom of Navigation Operations, that is the among the dumbest strategy I have ever seen.

This is the barking dog strategy.

Imagine 10 to 20 years in the future. The trade volume in the South China Sea will double, and the US Navy would have watched the trade volume double, because they had a front row seat to watch the trade volume doubling between China and ASEAN and other neighbours. So the US Navy conducts these FONOPs to watch China and the region build up their economic clout, with America excluded from it. Imagine China and America doubling their trade in 10 to 20 years, that never will happen.

Maybe the US Navy is doing these FONOPs so that one day they will attack all the container ships. When they do that, they attack the interests of all countries in Asia, including their friends and treaty allies. Is the US Navy going to that? Is the US Navy trying to help with the FONOPs?

In fact, no one knows what the US Navy is trying to accomplish, other than the barking dog strategy, which is not even a strategy. Maybe in the 36 Tricks book, they had something different, but a barking dog strategy cannot work.

If the US Navy does not bite, then all they do is watch the region move up in the world which does not mean US interests are benefitted. If the US Navy does bite, then no one would want them around anymore.

All China has done so far, is basically bark back. So I guess on some level, it is working. <rant></rant>

Forget South China Sea route in next few years ..... as all CPEC projects under road network are completed already while railway project is going to start from March with $ 8 Billion ...... further, China also joined ITI (Islamabad/Tehran/Istanbul) rail network by which in less then 40 days their goods will reach to EU.....

 

[NiuBiDaRen]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358705667616432128

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358948900229402624

 

[Gatekeeper]

This is the thing... when the international media complain about censorship in China... they are in fact trying to or intent on changes to the rules in China to allow themselves to be exempt or change of the rules in its entirety... which mean they are trying effect change in the internal system of the PRC to their view point...

In this case the Chinese government made a statement that they will respond and have the right to respond, which they have... you can criticise them if in fact this response involves them insisting on changes to the way OFCOM as the regulating authority, regulates the framework by which broadcaster ownership is restricted... but at this moment they have not... by claiming that they are attempting to effect specific internal change by simply making a statement concerning their right to make a response, you are in fact assigning guilt... basically that is guilty until proven innocent.

No, by the fact that the government, controls funding, appoint the chairman and even have control of the right of the BBC’s very existence, it excerpt influence on the way in which the BBC conduct it’s business... in the internal sense the political pressure of the other parties will keep this in check... but externally, in the case of China for example it would toll the line that the British government wish for, as evident by the way in which it conducts it supposed investigations into various perceived issues involving China and by the way in which it reports what it perceives as issues, where the view point of China is automatically dismissed and any critical voice is amplified... this is also for Russia... Whether the government can affect the BBC directly with regards to it’s daily operation or editorially is irrelevant...

This is the part I am also unsure about too... I did find however a report by the Secretary of State dated 26-09-2015 about media ownership

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Section 4: Preventing undue influence, which suggest such rule didn’t exist before... I do have one suspicion as to why the Conservative party didn’t produce their own tv channel before and that is viewership, or more correctly lack there of, for any new media channel... additionally, if we remember, 2015 was when stories after stories of China militarisation of the SCS came out... and this report just so happened in 2015...

On the assumption that such rules came into effect recently... and the fact that there wasn’t any major outcry in the UK concerning this rule change, would mean that there wasn’t an issue of undue influence in regards to UK broadcasters... the only major affected party would be the Chinese broadcaster as the methodology used in their operations would be directly in conflict with said rule... If the investigation begun in 2019 it is reasonable to assume that the US’s decision to officially list all Chinese state media as propaganda would have influence the decision for the investigation in the first place, which in turn would mean it was a decision of political motivation

If, on the contrary, on assumption that such restrictions were in place far earlier, then such investigation should have been conducted far earlier, if the principal behind the rule is followed, rather than specifically in 2019, where the relationship of China and the west becoming more and more tension filled, also making the decision one of political motivation...

Look if the rules were changed and they breached it... then fair enough... but it’s my contention that
1, if the changes are recently then they are politically motivated. As the major affected party has no recourse due to inherent organisational as well as governmental structure, in effect the rule change was targeted at the Chinese.
2, if the rule has long been enforced, then the timing of said investigation is political motivated. As, if by the principal of fairness, such an investigation would have long been conducted as those critical facts concerning the affected party would have been known since the inception of the rule... and in fact since the inception of the affected organisation...
3, issuing a statement of response is not and cannot be constituted as affecting internal affairs as no actions to this effect has been made...

@SampanViking
@plawolf

Guys, I know the debate is over since @SampanViking checked mate our friend. But when i saw Wolfie's 'yes minister' sketch. It reminded me of this..

I know it's satire comedy. But it's closer to the truth than most people realised. In fact, in real life it's less subtle.

Here, we see the minister with his loyal servent trying to 'influence' BBC decision. It's a gem.

 

[NiuBiDaRen]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1359044913501855750

Cultural genocide you say?

 

[NiuBiDaRen]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1358708860446404613

Man laowhy86 calling his mixed baby "it" because his baby turned out looking more Asian than Caucasian (which typically happens because Asian alleles are more dominant than recessive to Caucasian ones). Also making his Chinese wife sit on the van floor while his own family sat on seats. It's a good thing cucks get married off to these worthless men so they don't ruin healthy, respectful men. Trash needs to be paired with trash.

These are the two most famous China vloggers on the Internet. Millions of people watch them to learn about what Chinese or non-Western culture is 'supposedly' like. Maybe our friend from the A-Team is a donating subscriber to them. I'm told recently on an episode about the GameStop trend, they said poor people were retarded while rich people were mentally superior, filming themselves while driving a sports car through Beverly Hills.

 

[plawolf]

That's the whole point.

China offers a better deal.

Full stop. Unless the Americans can somehow offer a better deal, then the current situation will persist into future, diminishing American influence a little bit more each year as we go along.

As we can see currently, the Americans have no capacity to offer a better deal, so it resorts to coercion to its allies and negative campaigning against China (stories of fake genocide).

Just my opinion but this does not have a chance.

The stories of fake genocide, does that stop America from doing business with the Chinese?

Yes? No?

Why would anyone else be any different?

Unless we think Australia or corrupt UK politicians are the center of the world.

Someone is being played. It ain't the Chinese.

It’s not that America has no capacity to offer a better deal, with their unlimited cash print cheat, they can offer deals China simply cannot match.

The issue is more one of mentality. The west in general and America in particular has gotten too used to being able to impose their terms on the rest of the world. That was how America was able to maintain such exceptionally high living standards for its people during its golden age of the 80s-early 2000s. The world paid what America asked for, which is why American cleaners were able to live better than the elite of the rest of the world.

China’s greatest ‘crime’ is that it offered something approaching fair trading terms.

At first America and the west rejoiced because it meant their poor can buy more and better quality stuff which raised their living standards and solved their persistent high inflation problems; but as China climbed the value chain (which was something the ‘copy-pasta zero creativity’ Chinese were supposed to be categorically unable to do according to all the western experts of the time), that gradually became more of a problem since China was now threatening the position of western elites.

 

[bobdole]

Forget South China Sea route in next few years ..... as all CPEC projects under road network are completed already while railway project is going to start from March with $ 8 Billion ...... further, China also joined ITI (Islamabad/Tehran/Istanbul) rail network by which in less then 40 days their goods will reach to EU.....

ITI rail network will soon experience freedom of navigation exercises.
But in all seriousness I hope ITI succeeds so the disgusting legacies of colonialism can be put to bed.

 

[horse]

It’s not that America has no capacity to offer a better deal, with their unlimited cash print cheat, they can offer deals China simply cannot match.

That is not how it works in my opinion.

America does not manufacture a single cell phone that we all use. We know who makes most of the cell phones in this world. China became the biggest trading nation to most countries in this world and that gap will widen in the coming decades. China leads everybody on 5G equipment. As of now, China is the largest consumer market in the world, bigger than America. China is offering more, a better deal.

America is incapable of matching this. There is no capacity to do so at the moment, and in some cases, probably never at this point in the game.

Perhaps America can cheat, run the printing presses, then take that money and subsidize their industries, bringing jobs back to American shores and increasing industrial production. That would be making a better deal.

However, someone in the PBoC can go into the basement, turn on the lights, and start running the printing presses, then take that money and subsidize industries, keeping China Inc. running smoothly. With the RMB backed by the world's biggest holding of FX reserves, they can do that too.

I do not see how we can give America an advantage here. Especially on the point when it comes to cheating, both countries can do the exact same thing.

More so to the point, that the United States has been running the printing presses since the 2008 Financial Crisis, precipitated by the Lehman Brothers collapse with helicopter Ben and his quantitative easing, which occurred during this pandemic too.

All that had no affect to improve American industrial capacity or what America had to offer, that was a better offer than China.

We are getting to a point, where the theoretical and the practical are being closed off to the Americans.

So all we see in the press is Saddam Hussein type of demonization of China, and increased military activities. The others cards have been played. They can play them again, but the same results will be the outcome.

 

[SilentObserver]

I do not see how we can give America an advantage here. Especially on the point when it comes to cheating, both countries can do the exact same thing.

The US is able to maintain its largest export, the USD and provide liquidity to the world as long as it holds political control of the major economies or at least maintain considerable influence. The polity and central bank needs to be in line to coordinate. Economically and politically sovereign nations have this set up or it would be difficult to withstand crisis. This is also why for the EU to survive as an entity, they have come to the conclusion that they will need to centralize politically or await dissolution. The US is just playing this out on a larger scale. Instead of 2 dozen European nations, it is global.

The world is a systems of systems and boundaries are often blurred. The US is essentially setting up a global government with the fed as the global central bank other central banks will exist much like local feds. To weather the excesses of costs of empire and other spending, they have an imperative to centralise global influence, hence why we hear American politicians and think tanks constantly talk about American leadership, full spectrum dominance, American exceptionslism (aka we can but you cannot). Essentially creating a monopoly on power, the definition of a government but globally to support a global banking system.

True sovereignty to national governments would be seen as sedition to the global empire. So long as US is able to maintain its pillars of power, the game can go on for a long time.