Discussing Biden's Potential China Policy

  • Thread starter Deleted member 15887
  • Start date

bajingan

Senior Member
There's strong evidence to believe that it was planned. Geopolitics is an overarching theme in American power projection. The goal is to maintain status as a dominating force on the World Island (Eurasia) despite being situated on the peripheral islands. One way to achieve that is to fracture any cohesion within the world island and maintain footholds. Lanes of communication would be forced to point towards the oceans that surround Eurasia which will be dominated by the US Navy.

Geographically 5 eyes are all situated around the world island. They are all smaller islands the surround the main World Island thus have similar geopolitical imperatives, it's just that America is by far the largest player. Zbigniew Brzezinski was the main geopolitical strategist for America during the last few decades, his school of thought lives on through his disciples whom work in non-elected areas of influence in DC. It don't see that changing whether it's democrat or republican. I recommend reading his book the Grand Chessboard.

General Wesley Clark was responsible for planning the Iraq War but the idea of invading Iraq and how it fits into greater geopolitics came from higher up. Initially even he was confused as to why invasion of Iraq was necessary, especially in the context of "War on Terror". He was sceptical towards the connection between Saddam and Al-Qaeda. In some other videos he explicitly mentions the geopolitical motivation of invasion of Iraq which he didn't initially think of.

"...but in fact the why of it went back a decade, to the spring of 1991. It went back to the argument inside the republican party about whether or not the gulf war should have ended with the capture of Baghdad and the overthrow of Saddam Hussain. And in 1991 when I talked to secretary Wolfowitz, you know what he said, 'we didn't get rid of Saddam Hussain and we should have'. He said we only have 5 or 10 years to clean up the middle east, these old soviet surrogate regimes like Syria and Iraq. Get rid of them before the next superpower comes along to challenge us..."

To the American strategists at the time it wasn't likely that China would rise so quickly if at all beyond a labour intensive processing location. In retrospect some Americans say allowing China to join the WTO was a grave strategic mistake but it really wasn't obvious at the time. At the time China just laid off 40 million state workers who were accustomed to the "iron rice bowl" system of the SOEs after the Asian financial crisis. Either way American strategists thought it doesn't matter who the rising power would be. They would see a very similar geopolitical reality as the Americans and must alter the fundamentals within the era of power vacuum before the next superpower rises. That timeline was perceived to be 5-10 years. The actual implementation took much longer than expected and the next power rose much faster than expected.

7 countries in 5 years. "starting with Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran". This was an interview from 2007. Syrian civil war started in 2011 and still ongoing, Lebanon is failing as a state, Libyan civil war started in 2014 and still in turmoil, Somalia is a failed state, Sudan was split into 2 countries in 2011 and in constant conflict, Iran is still holding on and the last one on their list. There exists a longer version of this interview.

Hawkish members of the PLA was fairly clear on the state of the world though might not have been popular at the time due to the overall political climate. Dai Xu in 2009 did a talk about his own projections on the coming "harvest" of China by America with frictions between the 2 nations coming to a climax around 2030. He explains many of the fundamental factors that will create this situation. In the 2000s Dai Xu was very critical of China's heavy reliance upon international trade as a percentage of GDP and concentration in non-advanced sectors. This made a dramatic shift over the last 10-15 years.
I wonder if the pandemic is part of their plan or it simply a natural event that they were taken by suprise by it?
Cause due to coronavirus the american economic and political stability was hit badly and thus it gives China the momentum and time to consolidate its economic and political power at home and abroad to be practically unassailable
Its a godsend to be honest, China was being hit by all directions until coronavirus happened and suddenly all of her enemies is severely weakened
Were covid never happened one must wonder how different events might unfold
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
...
1) the military official says that post 911 the war on terra in the middle east was mainly about China, specifically what we know of now as BRI... so was this just happenstance, or true planning ahead, or bunch of retroactive revisionists pat on the back?

Basically, if US started the war on terra back in 2003 (it would have planned it per PNAC docs around 2000) for purpose of China containment why did it not do the sort of tech containment until well into the next decade of 2010s.... really started in earnest around 2015 and after...

Has America been playing the long game against China all this time and acting dumb but behind the scenes there is some 11D Chess reverse pysops going on?
...

He's talking BS. I remember reading the PNAC text back then. The war in the Middle East was never about cutting Chinese growth in the Middle East. The PNAC text back then said the aim was to make two wars to supposedly free up the troops that were stationed in the Iraq-Kuwait border and the North-South Korea border. The US was supposed to invade both Iraq and North Korea simultaneously once those people got into power. Then the US was supposed to invade Iran from Iraq. What derailed their plans in North Korea was they had to devote some resources to Afghanistan. It is true that the text said the troops they would have supposedly freed up would then be available for great power competition in the future i.e. against China (I think it even mentioned China specifically) if a conflict did happen in the XXIst century but it was never about the BRI or whatever which didn't even exist back then.

The PNAC also seemingly assumed once those regional wars ended they wouldn't need occupation forces in either of those places. Something seriously misguided as anyone who has read about the German and Japanese occupations would certainly know (not them).
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
I wonder if the pandemic is part of their plan or it simply a natural event that they were taken by suprise by it?
Cause due to coronavirus the american economic and political stability was hit badly and thus it gives China the momentum and time to consolidate its economic and political power at home and abroad to be practically unassailable
Its a godsend to be honest, China was being hit by all directions until coronavirus happened and suddenly all of her enemies is severely weakened
Were covid never happened one must wonder how different events might unfold

I believe that too .. but it surprised them badly ;) of how well China was able to contain it. The US and EU were too over confident that they would be able to contain it and the rest is we know what happened

Actually not only China able to contain the virus extremely well ... China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and of course NZ :rolleyes:

I think UK and India would get hit hardest .... significantly worse than the US. The problem with India, so many poor people get infected and it may not be included in the statistic.
 

quantumlight

Junior Member
Registered Member
I wonder if the pandemic is part of their plan or it simply a natural event that they were taken by suprise by it?
Cause due to coronavirus the american economic and political stability was hit badly and thus it gives China the momentum and time to consolidate its economic and political power at home and abroad to be practically unassailable
Its a godsend to be honest, China was being hit by all directions until coronavirus happened and suddenly all of her enemies is severely weakened
Were covid never happened one must wonder how different events might unfold
In geopolitics there are, for the most part, no coincidences... certain the timing of it, whilst so far still circumstantial, is very suspect in my opinion...
Having said that, if you draw parallels from the Huawei situation, the US is doing it in staggered phasing and expecting to get a win and when its not happening it will keep pushing and pushing until something happens.... just look at the US ban of Huawei, first it was US gov told AT&T and Verizon to cancel the deal that they signed with Huawei that would have brought Huawei handsets/smartphone into the US market, then it was US banned all of Huawei within the US. So Ren thought well Huawei can still thrive in the rest of the world including EU etc... then they kidnap Huawei CFO/Ren daughter while Xi was having dinner with Trump (Trump loves to show off and have "power" over his opponent) and initially Trump himself said if China bend the knee in the Trade Deal he will release the Huawei princess etc... so you know they were using her to play that hostage card for Xi to accept a Plaza Accord 2.0...

When that didn't happen is when in May 2019 they dropped the hammer and put Huawei on the entity list. Most people at the time felt that use would eventually lower to minimus threshold from 25% to 10%... for a while Huawei was still bragging that it de-Amerikkanized its phone etc then eventually of course Trump dropped it to 0%... and that forced TSMC to severe all ties with Huawei, which was much more of a blow than even when it was rumored ARM would have to cut ties with Huawei etc..

Likewise, I see the US treatment of China following the same pattern as its persecution of Huawei... first trade war, then tech war, then secretive covert you know what warfare, and each time US hopes and expects that "this" will be enough to "do China in"... and if/when it doesn't , then it is forced to go to the next step/stages... So yeah I see the Tiawan card... I see a hot something in the SCS/ECS/TW etc... and if we are going to talk to final solution, in the eyes of the US, yes it will resort to what it did to the Japanese back in WWII... and I'm not just talking about the intern camps either....

As far as I know no country/city has ever been hit by a thermonuclear bomb yet, and I don't think China wants to find out... so that is why I, along with many others, believe its upmost imperative that China arm itself in terms of nuclear stockpile, both quantity and quality and detection/early warning and change its stance about no first use and the launch on detect etc etc
 

ansy1968

Brigadier
Registered Member
In geopolitics there are, for the most part, no coincidences... certain the timing of it, whilst so far still circumstantial, is very suspect in my opinion...
Having said that, if you draw parallels from the Huawei situation, the US is doing it in staggered phasing and expecting to get a win and when its not happening it will keep pushing and pushing until something happens.... just look at the US ban of Huawei, first it was US gov told AT&T and Verizon to cancel the deal that they signed with Huawei that would have brought Huawei handsets/smartphone into the US market, then it was US banned all of Huawei within the US. So Ren thought well Huawei can still thrive in the rest of the world including EU etc... then they kidnap Huawei CFO/Ren daughter while Xi was having dinner with Trump (Trump loves to show off and have "power" over his opponent) and initially Trump himself said if China bend the knee in the Trade Deal he will release the Huawei princess etc... so you know they were using her to play that hostage card for Xi to accept a Plaza Accord 2.0...

When that didn't happen is when in May 2019 they dropped the hammer and put Huawei on the entity list. Most people at the time felt that use would eventually lower to minimus threshold from 25% to 10%... for a while Huawei was still bragging that it de-Amerikkanized its phone etc then eventually of course Trump dropped it to 0%... and that forced TSMC to severe all ties with Huawei, which was much more of a blow than even when it was rumored ARM would have to cut ties with Huawei etc..

Likewise, I see the US treatment of China following the same pattern as its persecution of Huawei... first trade war, then tech war, then secretive covert you know what warfare, and each time US hopes and expects that "this" will be enough to "do China in"... and if/when it doesn't , then it is forced to go to the next step/stages... So yeah I see the Tiawan card... I see a hot something in the SCS/ECS/TW etc... and if we are going to talk to final solution, in the eyes of the US, yes it will resort to what it did to the Japanese back in WWII... and I'm not just talking about the intern camps either....

As far as I know no country/city has ever been hit by a thermonuclear bomb yet, and I don't think China wants to find out... so that is why I, along with many others, believe its upmost imperative that China arm itself in terms of nuclear stockpile, both quantity and quality and detection/early warning and change its stance about no first use and the launch on detect etc etc
Everything is fair game except for Taiwan, that is China red line, if US support the Taiwan independence the Chinese had the legal authority to invade Taiwan due to the One China policy. Trump is planning to go that route but hesitated, losing Taiwan under his watch will be horrible with resistance among those in the military establishment (China had the means to retaliate) and even among the 5eyes , Japan and the EU will not allow that to happen just to provoke China.
 

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
Biden is calling for federal spending of only $700 billion USD in his plan to invest in infrastructure, manufacturing, electric vehicles, artificial intelligence and other sectors.

Meanwhile:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


BTW, if you measure at PPP prices (more appropriate since shit is cheaper in China since they didn’t outsource everything + economies of scale), then China is spending $12.3 trillion USD over the next 5-7 years. Compared to Biden's proposal of just $700 billion (certain to get whittled down a lot, and likely may not even pass). Even if it passes, you are still being outspent by a factor of almost 20 times, and it's a losing battle if you don't significantly match China-levels of spending.

@weig2000 @localizer @solarz

Biden ain't going to spend on infrausture. Because reality bites. It's a wish list, not a to do list. As long as U.S. nor spending on arms they ain't going to have enough money for anything else.

FB_IMG_1613211590470.jpg

Let's not forget the current U.S. policy towards the world no matter who's the president. This policy requires a massive amount of U.S. money.

@LesAdieux @ansy1968

Here's to your 4 years and China's red line

FB_IMG_1613260343112.jpg
 
Last edited:

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Here is the full ISEAS report.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I wouldn't be overly concern with this report as it is not representative and a flawed report. On page 6 of the showing among those surveyed, you will see that the survey is significantly weighted and biased towards Vietnam in 2021 compared to 2020. Vietnam has very limited influence within ASEAN and yet was given a disproportional weight in this survey compared to 2020.

Those countries where China has good or improving relationship with have been given lesser weight on this survey compared to last year.

Leave it to the anglo media to find any selective material to sell their propaganda.


The most telling part in the ASEAN survey is Q53 Why do you trust the US?

The responses from ASEAN choose US economic strength (50.3%) and US military strength (26.7%)

But in the future, let's say it becomes obvious that China has economic and military superiority over the USA.
We should therefore see a collapse in pro-US views within ASEAN.

Q53 Why do you trust the US?

Answer

50.3% The US has vast economic resources and the political will to provide global leadership
26.7% The US military power is an asset for global peace and security
23.0% Other
 

KYli

Brigadier
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
US authorities are rounding up Chinese with advanced research backgrounds on charges they have undisclosed ties to Beijing

The FBI last month arrested Gang Chen, a well-known MIT nanotechnologist, and charged the China-born naturalized American with concealing close and lucrative connections to China’s scientific and technological establishment on his applications for federal research grants.
Chen, who has pleaded not guilty and is supported by MIT, is not the only prominent academic figure to be arrested and charged with failing to disclose connections to Chinese research institutes.

At least half a dozen have been arrested in the last year or so. They include Charles Lieber, the chair of the Harvard University Chemistry Department, who is accused of concealing his participation in an ambitious, state-sponsored Chinese effort to recruit top scientists and engineers from around the world to work in China.

Under it, FBI field offices and US Attorneys have conducted hundreds of investigations and made dozens of arrests across the country for technology theft, visa fraud, cyber-espionage and other illicit activities in the United States.

These operations have succeeded in exposing “the diversity of the Chinese effort,” as John C. Demers, the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general for national security, put it. Among its more threatening aspects is a state-directed campaign to send advanced Chinese researchers to the United States while disguising their true identities.

Last July, the FBI arrested four Chinese nationals posing as ordinary graduate school researchers. They were actually Chinese army officers. One of them, Xin Wang, was working in a medical lab at the University of California-San Francisco funded by the National Institutes of Health. Wang admitted to being a major in the Chinese People’s Liberation Army and employed by a military lab in China. He was deported.

Another of the arrested Chinese, Kaikai Zhao, was studying machine learning and artificial intelligence at the Luddy School of Informatics, Computing and Engineering at Indiana University.

What happened after those four arrests was even more revealing about the scope of China’s clandestine presence in the United States. An estimated 1,000 Chinese graduate researchers abruptly fled the country and returned to China – apparently, in the view of American officials, because they had concealed their ties to the Chinese military and were afraid of arrest.

Still, 1,000 researchers represent a tiny fraction of the 360,000 Chinese nationals enrolled in American colleges and universities, many of whom, perhaps the large majority of whom, are engaged in activities above reproach.

US taxpayers subsidize the education of many of the Chinese grad students working in labs and research institutes around the country. At MIT alone, there are generally between 700 and 800 Chinese graduate students at any given time, in addition to more than 100 exchange and visiting scholars.

It is standard procedure at most major universities that advanced graduate students in technical fields cover the cost of their studies through salaries from the labs where they work, and the salaries are commonly paid out of grants from such federal agencies as the National Science Foundation, NASA, the Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health.

“It’s no mystery who pays for research that goes on at top-level research institutions,” one senior professor said, asking not to be named. “It comes from domestic grants, not from abroad.

“If you have 360,000 undergraduates, that’s not much of a risk,” Demers said. “If they’re graduate students, you look at the fields they’re in, and the more sophisticated they are, the more risky it is. The Chinese are trying to get the latest 5% of cutting-edge research, and only the most sophisticated researchers can do this.”

Many academics and China experts say this investment in Chinese-born students helps the United States. In speeches and articles, for example, MIT’s president, L. Rafael Reif, has argued that international exchanges are of inestimable value to the United States and that substantial numbers of the advanced Chinese students choose to remain in America, where they contribute to the progress of American science.

One study cited by Reif shows that around 80% of the Chinese getting doctorates in the United States are still in the country 10 years after receiving their degrees.

Even if some of them maintain ties to colleagues and research institutes in China, Reif and many others argue, the key to scientific supremacy is not impeding someone else’s progress, but increasing America’s own investments in research, development and talent.

Still, a major part of China’s modernization push depends on the acquisition of technology from scientifically advanced Western countries, whether through legal, transparent means or by espionage and other illicit practices.

“The PRC and their leadership still do not believe that they’re going to succeed in their tech breakout without siphoning off massive amounts of tech from the United States,” Matt Pottinger, the departing Trump administration deputy national security adviser, said.

“You hear that they’ve already broken out, that they don’t need us, and there are pockets where that’s true, but they lack confidence that they can achieve and sustain a technology edge without significant access to American labs.”

The Trump administration took what some former officials call a “targeted approach” to the Chinese effort to send to the US students who are directly under the control of the Chinese government. Last year, for example, it canceled visas for students directly affiliated with the Chinese military, as well for students coming to the country on Chinese government scholarships that required them to share whatever they learned with the Chinese state.

An estimated 2,000 students were expelled or barred from coming to the country – not including the thousand who fled on their own – a number still representing less than 1% of Chinese students in the US. Nonetheless, cracking down on them, as Pottinger put it, served as “a warning shot, and we had info that these people were there basically to siphon technology.”

“There are cases where we discovered US government grants where the primary interlocutor would be an American, but most of the work was being done by PRC [People’s Republic of China] nationals,” Pottinger said. “It was a sign to us of how complacent the screening procedures were for Department of Defense contracts. Sometimes it was really sensitive stuff.”

In some cases discovered by Joske, Chinese military officers working abroad claim affiliation with “non-existing institutions with innocuous-sounding names,” presumably to avoid calling attention to themselves on their visa applications.

At least five scientists from the military’s Rocket Force Engineering University have traveled abroad as visiting scholars, giving their home institution as the Xian Research Institute, which, Joske says, appears to exist only on paper.

The main charge against Lieber, the former chairman of the Harvard chemistry department, is that he concealed his involvement in the so-called Thousand Talents Program to recruit scientists to China, for which, according to the FBI, he was paid a salary of $50,000 a month by the Wuhan University of Technology, which also gave him a $1.5 million grant to establish a research lab there.

“The government has this wrong,” maintains Lieber’s lawyer, Marc Mukasey. “He is the victim in this case, not the perpetrator.”

In addition to Chen and Lieber, professors from the University of Arkansas, the University of Kansas, West Virginia University, the University of Tennessee, among other schools, have been indicted on similar charges. Their specialties have included biomedical engineering, chemical nanoscience, molecular reactions in coal conversion, and cardio-vascular genetics.

One of these cases is against Simon Saw-Teung Ang, a Malaysian-born American citizen who until 2020 was the director of the High Density Electronics Center at the University of Arkansas.

Ang, according to the Justice Department announcement of his arrest, concealed that he “received money and benefits from China and was closely associated with various companies based in China during the same time he was receiving grants from various United States Government agencies,” including NASA.

The government also alleges that he kept his China ties secret because for fear disclosing them might jeopardize his federal grant applications.

The crime alleged against American academics is essentially that they sought to defraud the American taxpayer by concealing required information on grant applications and, in some instances, by double-dipping – getting money from the American government to carry out research that was also being financed by China.

In the case of MIT’s Gang Chen, the government says he concealed a $19 million payment from China’s Southern Science and Technology University to help create a new center of science and engineering in Massachusetts. But according to Reif, MIT’s president, the money was for MIT, not for Chen individually. “This is not an individual collaboration,” he said. “It is a departmental one, supported by the institute.”

One hundred faculty colleagues of Chen’s wrote an open letter of support, saying that the activities claimed by the government to be criminal are actually “routine and even innocuous,” and that “the complaint against Gang Chen is a complaint against all of us.”
 

quantumlight

Junior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
US authorities are rounding up Chinese with advanced research backgrounds on charges they have undisclosed ties to Beijing

The FBI last month arrested Gang Chen, a well-known MIT nanotechnologist, and charged the China-born naturalized American with concealing close and lucrative connections to China’s scientific and technological establishment on his applications for federal research grants.
Chen, who has pleaded not guilty and is supported by MIT, is not the only prominent academic figure to be arrested and charged with failing to disclose connections to Chinese research institutes.

At least half a dozen have been arrested in the last year or so. They include Charles Lieber, the chair of the Harvard University Chemistry Department, who is accused of concealing his participation in an ambitious, state-sponsored Chinese effort to recruit top scientists and engineers from around the world to work in China.

Under it, FBI field offices and US Attorneys have conducted hundreds of investigations and made dozens of arrests across the country for technology theft, visa fraud, cyber-espionage and other illicit activities in the United States.

These operations have succeeded in exposing “the diversity of the Chinese effort,” as John C. Demers, the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general for national security, put it. Among its more threatening aspects is a state-directed campaign to send advanced Chinese researchers to the United States while disguising their true identities.

Last July, the FBI arrested four Chinese nationals posing as ordinary graduate school researchers. They were actually Chinese army officers. One of them, Xin Wang, was working in a medical lab at the University of California-San Francisco funded by the National Institutes of Health. Wang admitted to being a major in the Chinese People’s Liberation Army and employed by a military lab in China. He was deported.

Another of the arrested Chinese, Kaikai Zhao, was studying machine learning and artificial intelligence at the Luddy School of Informatics, Computing and Engineering at Indiana University.

What happened after those four arrests was even more revealing about the scope of China’s clandestine presence in the United States. An estimated 1,000 Chinese graduate researchers abruptly fled the country and returned to China – apparently, in the view of American officials, because they had concealed their ties to the Chinese military and were afraid of arrest.

Still, 1,000 researchers represent a tiny fraction of the 360,000 Chinese nationals enrolled in American colleges and universities, many of whom, perhaps the large majority of whom, are engaged in activities above reproach.

US taxpayers subsidize the education of many of the Chinese grad students working in labs and research institutes around the country. At MIT alone, there are generally between 700 and 800 Chinese graduate students at any given time, in addition to more than 100 exchange and visiting scholars.

It is standard procedure at most major universities that advanced graduate students in technical fields cover the cost of their studies through salaries from the labs where they work, and the salaries are commonly paid out of grants from such federal agencies as the National Science Foundation, NASA, the Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health.

“It’s no mystery who pays for research that goes on at top-level research institutions,” one senior professor said, asking not to be named. “It comes from domestic grants, not from abroad.

“If you have 360,000 undergraduates, that’s not much of a risk,” Demers said. “If they’re graduate students, you look at the fields they’re in, and the more sophisticated they are, the more risky it is. The Chinese are trying to get the latest 5% of cutting-edge research, and only the most sophisticated researchers can do this.”

Many academics and China experts say this investment in Chinese-born students helps the United States. In speeches and articles, for example, MIT’s president, L. Rafael Reif, has argued that international exchanges are of inestimable value to the United States and that substantial numbers of the advanced Chinese students choose to remain in America, where they contribute to the progress of American science.

One study cited by Reif shows that around 80% of the Chinese getting doctorates in the United States are still in the country 10 years after receiving their degrees.

Even if some of them maintain ties to colleagues and research institutes in China, Reif and many others argue, the key to scientific supremacy is not impeding someone else’s progress, but increasing America’s own investments in research, development and talent.

Still, a major part of China’s modernization push depends on the acquisition of technology from scientifically advanced Western countries, whether through legal, transparent means or by espionage and other illicit practices.

“The PRC and their leadership still do not believe that they’re going to succeed in their tech breakout without siphoning off massive amounts of tech from the United States,” Matt Pottinger, the departing Trump administration deputy national security adviser, said.

“You hear that they’ve already broken out, that they don’t need us, and there are pockets where that’s true, but they lack confidence that they can achieve and sustain a technology edge without significant access to American labs.”

The Trump administration took what some former officials call a “targeted approach” to the Chinese effort to send to the US students who are directly under the control of the Chinese government. Last year, for example, it canceled visas for students directly affiliated with the Chinese military, as well for students coming to the country on Chinese government scholarships that required them to share whatever they learned with the Chinese state.

An estimated 2,000 students were expelled or barred from coming to the country – not including the thousand who fled on their own – a number still representing less than 1% of Chinese students in the US. Nonetheless, cracking down on them, as Pottinger put it, served as “a warning shot, and we had info that these people were there basically to siphon technology.”

“carry out research that was also being financed by China.

In the case of MIT’s Gang Chen, the government says
The thing is this FBI purge is for the most part just pure bullshit, the same bullshit that was used to "justify" the kidnapping and hostage holding of Huawei CFO...

And the FBI purge has been going on for a long time, see previous bullshit purges

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This is a double edge sword, if America continues to indiscriminately purge ethnic Chinese (even those that are US citizens, whom have done nothing wrong) and create in effect the culture and norm of a red scare 2.0 and new Chinese Exclusion Act, the Chinese government needs to capitalize on this and make efforts to highlight Amerikkka Cultural Revolution and the FBI purge quotas so as to both warn dispora abroad and to deter talented Chinese from choosing to take their skills to Amerikkka...

I get it the US intent is to prevent China from continuing to close the gap... But it they continue to go about this stupidly, this could actually turn out to be a net boon to China if play cards right... they are running scared because China is catching up not because of Chinese spying... these racists supremacists cannot fathom how a bunch of chinamen can ever catch up and surpass them if it were not for wholesale theft and cheating. This is the real crux of the matter, not spying allegations. None of the highly publicized FBI purges have been about catching real spies, and if US was purging real Chinese spies, it wouldnt make it in the news... certainly not in this fashion...

Lets put it this way, Amerikkka tech preeminence is nothing without foreign talent, brain drain and hard working Chinese researchers and scientists... let them decouple and see who net gains in the long term... I know which way this wind blows
 
Last edited:
Top