Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Idiots should have followed the US playbook and went all in with the bomb threat lie.
Have someone make a make manifesto and deep fake ‘jihad’ video of this western agent in journalist cover and have armed police double tap him on the plane.
Then they can produce a bomb vest and claim they are the hero’s for stopping a terrorist attack.
Hell, if they really want to be dramatic, they could evacuate the plane, clip a bomb belt on the body, drag it off the plane and have a robot remote detonate in on the tarmac for the world press to broadcast live.
Have someone make a make manifesto and deep fake ‘jihad’ video of this western agent in journalist cover and have armed police double tap him on the plane.
Then they can produce a bomb vest and claim they are the hero’s for stopping a terrorist attack.
Hell, if they really want to be dramatic, they could evacuate the plane, clip a bomb belt on the body, drag it off the plane and have a robot remote detonate in on the tarmac for the world press to broadcast live.
Mr T
Senior Member
Not really. No fighters were sent up to force it to land, nor were fake bomb threats made. The plane had to land due to issues regarding fuel levels.
Bolivia claimed that a number of countries closed their airspace, which appears to have been true. However, the plane had the option of reversing course to allow for a different route to be plotted after refuelling. It does not, for example, appear to have been trapped over Austrian airspace.
I wasn't aware of that, and most of the articles are from pro-Russian websites so I'm taking it with a pinch of salt. However, even those articles admit that the plane in question originated in the Ukraine. There is a big difference in ordering a plane to return to its departure airport (Ukraine 2016) and intercepting it in mid air over a third country that was neither the origin nor destination (this recent case).
Because they're not comparable.
There is a difference between seeking to overthrow the CCP and criticising the elites for using their influence to keep people down or having special privileges normal citizens can't enjoy.
Right. So what happens to the 99.9% of people who can't get into the elite?
China isn't western Europe with an excellent social welfare and public healthcare system. If you don't succeed in China you can, despite working hard, not end up with much. Otherwise you're suggesting that people in China are poor only if they don't work hard enough. That's the sort of patrician attitude China is supposed to be against.
I hate to burst your bubble but the World Economic Forum would disagree with you.
China is number 45 out of 82 countries. Yes, it's ahead of India, but it's clearly behind a long list of countries. You can't have a comparison list of just China and India - it doesn't help ordinary Chinese people who deserve more.
I thought the US was still ahead, but maybe you're talking about annual growth. Anyway, the number of billionaires is partly down to the population. India has the third most in the world after the US & China, but you wouldn't argue that means their society is in good shape.
The chance of an ordinary Chinese person becoming rich is still very low and, as I've pointed out, social mobilty and inequality remains bad in China. It's better than it was in 1949, but it's nothing to justify telling people they need to obey the rich and powerful without question.
That suggests the only thing that matters is growth. If it mostly goes into the pockets of the elite, who use their power to deny social security and support to those who need it, it's of no use to most people.
If that was the case then there would be no successful small companies, only mega-corporations headed by the richest people in the world. Indeed, large companies often grow by buying up smaller competitors and purchasing their intellectual property. Not always of course, but it happens quite a lot.
No, because I don't work on 5G. I'd be really worried if a Chief Executive knew nothing about the area they worked in.
He probably couldn't hold a conversation with me on the field I work in, so what does that prove? Does it mean I'm his equal? Or that he's not as smart as you think he is?
If that was true China would have much better social mobility and be a less unequal society (measured by gini coefficient).
I'm happy for you to post one more message if you want, so I'll just say this. Being able to criticise elites is important. Elites frequently want to pay next to no tax and usually oppose good social security on the basis they'll be made to pay for it. In a country like China where even talking about political reform can get you jailed, public pressure on the amount of tax they pay and what social projects can be funded with said taxation is important. It's not just about medical or unemployment support, it's also about education especially for rural areas that always get left behind.
Otherwise China will remain an extremely unequal society because those at the top will keep kicking off those that try to climb up the ladder.
Well, they attempted to do a coup in Belarus. Also, if you believe the latest reports, they even had plans to kill Lukashenko and his family.
The US just scored an own goal here just like they did with Erdogan a couple years back.
The one thing I think that Chinese scholars should focus more on is learning and revealing AmeriKKKa’s historical hypocrisies as a matter of international policy, as some here refer to as PR. Eric Li’s rebuttal, in which he cited the falsity of the history of the one-person, one-vote system was spot-on. One example -and simply one of many examples- of this hypocrisy, is that AmeriKKKa had the audacity to claim the moral authority to conduct the Nuremberg Trials, in which Nazi doctors why tried for conducting inhumane an inhuman medical experiments, while, at the same time, they were conducting the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, a study they conducted for 30 years!
Why does AmeriKKKa care so much about Uyghurs, when it damn sure don’t care about Nyghurs!
If the US wants to use psy-ops to delegimate Chinese governance, then China can use factual history to reveal the illegitimacy of AmeriKKKan democracy. This is one ares that Chinese scholars may more profitably research, examine, and exploit!
Last edited:
Oops, I forgot that.
Yes if the reports were true then he would throw caution into the wind and start doing all sorts of stuff
I mean, if he knows that a superpower wants to assassinate him and his family, then thats gloves off from him
However I maintain my position that Belarus cannot withstand Western pressure. He should allow Russia to set up bases inside the country but I doubt the locals would want that
Yes, but notice the casualties they we willing to accept, back then; it’s a different calculus, now!
Now you know why Chairman Mao was adamant that this must be done at any cost:
Last edited:
I don't blame you for such a perception. Comparison shall be context-oriented in order to provide data points to the purpose of analysis. Otherwise, any comparison out of context is a "流氓行为".
For example, if you want to compare economic freedom between China and {USA, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Russia, Japan, Mexico} in the last {10,20,30,50,70} years, then you need to define metrics that qualitatively or qualitatively measure your target(s). If you want to start regression analysis from today backward to {10,20,30,50,70} years, that would help you more if you don't really understand China in those analysis windows. Let me walk you through such an analysis scenario.
When you want to compare with Japan in the regression window of {10,20,30} years, you sample Jiangsu+Shanghai+Zhejiang, because that is China's "Japan". Similar population, similar geographical location, event similar subculture. I would laugh my a$$ off if you say China's "Japanese" have less economic freedom than real Japanese. You might argue that comparison should be done on entire China. Then I would point out that illusional part: If you cannot beat China's "Japan", what is your hope?
Now let's move onto USA. For the same sampling window you do with Japan, you sample Jiangsu+Shanghai+Zhejiang+Shangdong+Fujian+Guangdong+Hebei+Beijing+Liaoning, which is China's "USA", for the same criteria. You may win the argument on absolute terms of today's individual data points. But you will absolute lose if you compare progressive rates during your sample windows. Oh, how about growth rates and trends?
At this point, you may smell sarcasm. I am not here to start a pissing context with you. I am here educating those who really are clueless of China yet saying things about fundamental aspects of China in the past {10,20,30,...} years.
My final point: If China as a whole is 50% as "rich" as USA, game is over for the rest of the world. So just for selfish reasons, all foreigners should not compare but rather hope that China stays "un-rich, un-free, etc."