Discussing Biden's Potential China Policy

  • Thread starter Deleted member 15887
  • Start date
W

weig2000

Captain
BoraTas said:
There are several red flags in this article. It repeats almost all myths about China.

"The U.S. economy is still $7 trillion larger than China’s."

Conclusion: Junk of an article that repeats all misconceptions about China.
Click to expand...

If you visit Foreign Affairs or Foreign Policy or other thinking tankie websites, they're churning out all these garbage reports & articles at an alarming rate. It's a testimony to the fact that the US has an excess of national security types of people who have nothing productive to do but figuring out ways to create net needs for national security, just for the sake of it.

Coming to the assertion that the US economy is still $7 trillion larger than China's - it's actually around $6 trillion at the end of last year. The gap is closing very rapidly; it will very likely be around $4 trillion at the end of this year and quite possibly be around $3 trillion by the end of next year. In other words, we're talking about 80%, close to 90% of US GDP respectively. The day of psychological reckoning - for these people who build their superiority on such shaky ground - is fast approaching.
 
Last edited:
V

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
If you visit Foreign Affairs or Foreign Policy or other thinking tankie websites, they're churning out all these garbage reports & articles at an alarming rate. It's a testimony to the fact that the US has an excess of national security types of people who have nothing productive to do but figuring out ways to create net needs for national security, just for the sake of it.

Coming to the assertion that the US economy is still $7 trillion larger than China's - it's actually around $6 trillion at the end of last year. The gap is closing very rapidly; it will very likely be around $4 trillion at the end of this year and quite possibly be around $3 trillion by the end of next year. In other words, we're talking about 80%, close to 90% of US GDP respectively. The day of psychological reckoning - for these people whose build their superiority on such shaky ground - is fast approaching.
Click to expand...
I am reading some times these website so let me rank based on my opinion:

Foreign Policy: Some times good, some times bad, and some times plain neo-cons trash articles. I find my self visiting it less and less as time passes. If it continues its current trajectory, I will probably stop reading it..
C

Foreign Affairs: I like them a lot, they offer the most accurate view of the "Establishment" and naturally they view the world from an American prism (bias). Almost always I find their analysis on point, however I would say that they are still stuck in their old ways (not enough innovative strategic thinking) and sometimes they are disconnected from the reality on the ground
B+

Diplomat: Well, their military section is top notch(A). Their diplomatic section is ok I guess, definetely less neo-con than Foreign Policy and far more practical however their views are still following the same "Establishment". So all in all, nothing out of the ordinary here.
B-


There other many more think-tanks of course but the above are the most known to this forum I guess. My overall opinion, is the same as yours. Too many national security guys with too many opinions and little practical experience. Offering many grandiose ideas with no knowledge on whats happening to the ground
 
BoraTas

BoraTas

Major
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
If you visit Foreign Affairs or Foreign Policy or other thinking tankie websites, they're churning out all these garbage reports & articles at an alarming rate. It's a testimony to the fact that the US has an excess of national security types of people who have nothing productive to do but figuring out ways to create net needs for national security, just for the sake of it.

Coming to the assertion that the US economy is still $7 trillion larger than China's - it's actually around $6 trillion at the end of last year. The gap is closing very rapidly; it will very likely be around $4 trillion at the end of this year and quite possibly be around $3 trillion by the end of next year. In other words, we're talking about 80%, close to 90% of US GDP respectively. The day of psychological reckoning - for these people who build their superiority on such shaky ground - is fast approaching.
Click to expand...
I sometimes think I worked for nothing when I read these guys. I am an engineer in the semiconductor industry. I worked a lot to be competitive in this cut-throat industry. I am sure these think tank analysts earn much more compared to me and their articles can be 100% fiction.
 
V

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
I sometimes think I worked for nothing when I read these guys. I am an engineer in the semiconductor industry. I worked a lot to be competitive in this cut-throat industry. I am sure these think tank analysts earn much more compared to me and their articles can be 100% fiction.
Click to expand...
Lol especially the semiconductors things was fun.. they just have a chinese(?) dude make a PowerPoint saying e.g last year China imported 80% of its chips, this year it imported 81% thus China is very far behind and there is no way for China to catch up..

Total clown. They dont make in depth analysis and investigation on Chinese companies. They just say SMIC this, SMIC that and case closed.

Like my man, who cares about SMIC, we care about SMEE (and CTEC I think its the other?), EUV, their suppliers, the universities, investment on the sector, talent, friendly gov policies etc..

If all their debates are going the same way as the semiconductors oneis then i understand why they failing so much.
 
W

weig2000

Captain
voyager1 said:
I am reading some times these website so let me rank based on my opinion:

Foreign Policy: Some times good, some times bad, and some times plain neo-cons trash articles. I find my self visiting it less and less as time passes. If it continues its current trajectory, I will probably stop reading it..
C

Foreign Affairs: I like them a lot, they offer the most accurate view of the "Establishment" and naturally they view the world from an American prism (bias). Almost always I find their analysis on point, however I would say that they are still stuck in their old ways (not enough innovative strategic thinking) and sometimes they are disconnected from the reality on the ground
B+

Diplomat: Well, their military section is top notch(A). Their diplomatic section is ok I guess, definetely less neo-con than Foreign Policy and far more practical however their views are still following the same "Establishment". So all in all, nothing out of the ordinary here.
B-


There other many more think-tanks of course but the above are the most known to this forum I guess. My overall opinion, is the same as yours. Too many national security guys with too many opinions and little practical experience. Offering many grandiose ideas with no knowledge on whats happening to the ground
Click to expand...

My rants were not simply for the purpose of bashing them. I actually tried to visit them, say, Foreign Affairs or Foreign Policy regularly. It's just that it's become increasingly difficult for me to keep up with the rates they're generating these types of pretty worthless articles.

Foreign Affairs is probably the most authoritative or "establishment" website/magazine. You have Clinton, Blinken, Campbell and people like them publishing their pieces. It's a place for people who are between their respective assignment roles in different administrations, or people peddling their wares to the administration.

Asia Times is much better, when it comes to Asia affairs, because it has diversity of opinions penned by people with diverse backgrounds. Compared to AT, you get the feeling that those people at Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy live in a bubble, talking mostly among themselves.
 
V

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
My rants were not simply for the purpose of bashing them. I actually tried to visit them, say, Foreign Affairs or Foreign Policy regularly. It's just that it's become increasingly difficult for me to keep up with the rates they're generating these types of pretty worthless articles.

Foreign Affairs is probably the most authoritative or "establishment" website/magazine. You have Clinton, Blinken, Campbell and people like them publishing their pieces. It's a place for people who are between their respective assignment roles in different administrations, or people peddling their wares to the administration.

Asia Times is much better, when it comes to Asia affairs, because it has diversity of opinions penned by people with diverse backgrounds. Compared to AT, you get the feeling that those people at Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy live in a bubble, talking mostly among themselves.
Click to expand...
Yep Foreign Affairs is basically the Establishment talking directly to the plebs lol

And for Asia Times I love it. Their Asia Times Premium(AT+) articles are the only thing I have seen in the internet that I really want to subscribe and give them money to get access. They offer diverse hugh-quality views and pragmatic analysis based on real facts on the ground.

East Asia Forum is also very good. They offer analysis taking into account the Chinese interests and goals, unlike the western think-tanks which circlejerk on their wonderful ideas often forgetting that there is also a 10 ft. China giant that actually exists and will take countermeasures on their actions
 
BoraTas

BoraTas

Major
Registered Member
voyager1 said:
Lol especially the semiconductors things was fun.. they just have a chinese(?) dude make a PowerPoint saying e.g last year China imported 80% of its chips, this year it imported 81% thus China is very far behind and there is no way for China to catch up..

Total clown. They dont make in depth analysis and investigation on Chinese companies. They just say SMIC this, SMIC that and case closed.

Like my man, who cares about SMIC, we care about SMEE (and CTEC I think its the other?), EUV, their suppliers, the universities, investment on the sector, talent, friendly gov policies etc..

If all their debates are going the same way as the semiconductors oneis then i understand why they failing so much.
Click to expand...
Let me tell you something. Nothing would change if China couldn't catch up too. It doesn't have to. Being a few nodes behind doesn't have any practical implications anymore. It used to be extremely important as each shrink meant a 55% increase in performance until the early-2000s. It was the primary driver of processor performance. Then, we ran into Von Neumann bottleneck. Also, clock speeds stalled. Now the performance increase from node shrinkage is less than 10%. Nowadays, how you implement your pre-fetch algorithms are more important than your node size. So far, it was still important for performance per Watt but that became mostly pointless too as most battery-powered devices are too powerful for their users. I am pretty sure that Huawei could release its flagship phones with SMIC 14 nm SoCs and most users wouldn't even notice it.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Phead128

Phead128

Major
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Team Blue said:
It's also just dumb. China isn't collapsing, it isn't going away. I'd rather we didn't have a second cold war and instead accept there are differences in governing philosophy and work with them.
Click to expand...

It isn't even an issue about governing philosophy. It's about US insecurities about losing Unipolar Hegemony in the world. China has no intention for global hegemony, but for multi-polarity and equality. If China becomes first among equals by virtue of it's weight/size, that's just icing on the cake.

All China needs to do is Grow, laugh at accusations of aggression/coercion (White guilt/US projections of guilt), and the rest of the world is likely to stay neutral and won't pick sides. By default, that would mean US has lost, world would trend to Multi-polarity.

The idea that US allies would let themselves get stomped by China just to maintain US hegemony and "rah rah liberty!" is horrendously laughable and downright idiotic. Nobody is going to sacrifice their self-interest because US has Unipolar hegemonic dreams.
 
Bellum_Romanum

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
voyager1 said:
I am reading some times these website so let me rank based on my opinion:

Foreign Policy: Some times good, some times bad, and some times plain neo-cons trash articles. I find my self visiting it less and less as time passes. If it continues its current trajectory, I will probably stop reading it..
C

Foreign Affairs: I like them a lot, they offer the most accurate view of the "Establishment" and naturally they view the world from an American prism (bias). Almost always I find their analysis on point, however I would say that they are still stuck in their old ways (not enough innovative strategic thinking) and sometimes they are disconnected from the reality on the ground
B+

Diplomat: Well, their military section is top notch(A). Their diplomatic section is ok I guess, definetely less neo-con than Foreign Policy and far more practical however their views are still following the same "Establishment". So all in all, nothing out of the ordinary here.
B-


There other many more think-tanks of course but the above are the most known to this forum I guess. My overall opinion, is the same as yours. Too many national security guys with too many opinions and little practical experience. Offering many grandiose ideas with no knowledge on whats happening to the ground
Click to expand...
Do you read the National Interest publication? Or the ones that are produced from the folks at Quincy. I find their writings/articles to be more balanced and less American centric.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top