Miscellaneous News

FriedButter

Major
Registered Member
Looking across the Chinese netizens comments I came across this incident. Apparently, CIA blew up Soviet gas pipeline to Western Europe in 1982.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The sheer hypocrisy of US claiming that China puts backdoors on its products. If this is not a warning for any future buyers of US technology for mission-critical uses, I don't know what is. Nord Stream may not be destroyed by Mk 48s afterall.

Conveniently, the CIA knew this attack was going to happen back in summer.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
The part about cohesive "they" is true but if Europe ceases being "led", then all countries within the union will benefit, it is a "win-win" condition for them so there is a unifying goal to obtain there. Plus there's already de-facto leadership in Europe - Germany & France with the first being the economic muscle and the latter being the military one. If they do become the "leader", then sure, the cracks would show and they wouldn't stay at the top for long.
Right, infighting would prevent the EU from becoming a unified pole of power and that infighting can only be quelled by a far superior power to unite and lead them like the US. None of the European countries have the courage to step away from the US order because unlike China, they crumble like a potato chip under sanctions. And on top of it, it's been repeated to them many times that the sake of their children having an advantage in life on the global stage from being white and Westerners hinges on their cooperation with the US to suppress China. It's true; if the Western alliance fails, Chinese people will become the most powerful race in the world and that serves none of Europe's interests. As white people, they can at least ride America's coat tails but never China's. So carrot and stick, the EU never wanted to turn away from the US.
If the US was gone or did not exist, there would be no EU in the first place because that blob was formed primarily to create a competitive singular market.
Exactly. That is why it cannot overthrow American control and become a pole of power.
In terms of revenue, Erickkson is around half of Qualcomm. ASML is only one part of the huge semiconductor production chain - the US companies dominate almost all other fields from EDA to wafer cleaning with some Japanese companies mixed in (e.g. Tokyo Electron) and some Chinese companies that are slowly gaining market share (like AMEC in plasma etching). ASML itself relies on the EUV power source produced in the US through Cymer.

European research is strong in fundamental sciences and some of the more "older" engineering branches. For example, in AI the Europe is significantly behind partially because they got colonized by the US big tech while China was able to avoid that trap. Quantum computing & communications are again China\USA, biotech is dominated by the US, etc.
Basically, European research is a very strong and capable, though in most regards, a junior partner of American research and would have presented a much more cohesive challenge to China if they worked together rather than the US (accidentally?) knee-capping the EU and eating parts of it as common meat before facing China alone.
The US just recently passed its science bill that exactly gives lots of funding to fundamental & applied research.
It's spread through many years and it is still dwarved by China's investment. America's current investment trend reminds me of the Soviets when they were in decline. They built things just for the sake of having them, not because they needed them. Investment built around vision and need is the key to growth; it is done naturally. Investment as a reaction of jealousy and anger is wasted.
Yes, it could, true - we are both speculating there, who knows what was the true reason. My opinion is primarily based on how the US treated its "allies" when they became challenging in some fields - like basically kidnapping CEO of Alcatel, crushing Japanese economy, etc.
Democracies with rival gangs vying for the vote act like mental hospital patients; it is often useless applying logic to them. Rather I see a past of failure and repeated mistakes, so this, analyzed with Occam's Razor, appears most like accidental friendly fire than 5D chess.
Oh, it is a coin toss actually. There are many racists in the scientific community and most of the time they are even worse than your average xenophobic hillbilly because they try to "explain" it - that's how we get all those racial theories, eugenics, etc.
And some are super "woke," especially in the young tech community, maybe not the biological sciences community. It pretty hard to find a conservative working high tech and those who are found out are often ostracized by their peers in the workplace. It's like that in the US, not sure about Europe.I must also add that the scientific community and environment in China is one of feverish growth, which is attractive to true scientists enthralled by technology while Silicon valley is in decline.

Lastly, it is not all about attracting immigration of singular scientists; there is also corporate investment abroad that flees Europe and while I believe that natural segregation and culture will favor the US in terms of immigration by singular scientists, corporate investment is on China's side.

In either case, it is a loss for the US. Where an economically sound Europe had 100 European scientists working productively on European payroll with the benefits going to both the US and the EU, now, there are 60 scientists in Europe barely putting up an effort due to lack of funding, maybe 25 in the US working on American pay, 5 in China whom they have to compete against, and maybe another 10 that went elsewhere/retired/can't be accounted for anymore. Numbers of course aren't exact but in any analysis, that's not a good trade.
Well, I agree to disagree there and the sequential issues then, because they are mostly opinion-based and we have different approaches to thinking about those issues. I can see the reasoning behind your explanation and I laid out mine at the top.
Sure, but I had to express a few more things, so I replied.
China vs. US is all about the economy. That’s the real fight. STEM and tech are all parts of that. China should focus on its economy, improve productivity, continue to move up the value chain, not get sucked into a Taiwan war, and not make the same mistakes the Soviets made in terms of arms race etc. etc….
It is actually all about technology, though a healthy economy is needed to support technological growth. Before China was engaged and attacked by the 8 nation gang, China's GDP was supreme in the world, but it was all silk, tea, useless things. The UK, with a much smaller GDP of steel, machinery, and military ware, was more than China could handle. So it's all about having the tech to do what others cannot, to create a military that cannot be opposed, and having an economy made of indigenized things so that it is sanction-proof. But in the end, since we live in a world with Western, mainly American, robbers who will take everything you have if you cannot defend it, it is technology that is needed to create a supreme military that is paramount.
 
Last edited:

getready

Senior Member
If Germany had a Abe-esque Prime Minister, there would be immense outrage, for obvious reasons. Meanwhile, western media shows their hypocrisy by glorifying Abe like he was a saint. As long as you're a US asset/buffer state against their enemies, they'll let anything slide.
Aus gotta be right up there in terms of glorifying Abe. 4 present and past prime ministers attended his funeral


Aus media even called him "man of steel" wtf!?
Screenshot_20220928_124920.jpg
 

supersnoop

Major
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Examples in the report include fake accounts posting memes targeting the left by alleging that the National Rifle Association of America paid off Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and the right by depicting a tentacled Biden gripping the world bearing nukes and machine guns.

“Unfortunately for Americans, this actually proved to be less toxic and divisive than an average copy of the New York Post”
 
Top