Cant he amend the Constitution? If he's as popular as you say then there would be less backlash no?
@Kaeshmiri its not the answer bro, what we need is a revolutionary gov't. Can't fix the constitution under normal process as most of our politician can be bought and want to protect their illegal business. An example is the Anti-Dynasty Bill still pending in congress, Politics here is a family business, you see the father in the Senate , his wife a congresswoman , his son a Governor and his daughter in law a city mayor and term limits is a joke, they can switch places and the routine continues. There is no POLITICAL mobility among the common masses to be elected, and once in power they will do anything to hold on it. The American knows how our political culture operates, they practically invented it for us.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Witches ride around on bamboo broomsticks now?
I guess technically it should be a panda hunt, since they apparently think bamboo is somehow involved.
Or do they actually think all Chinese leave a trail of glittering bamboo fairy dust wherever we go? Would kinda make sense since 99% of the China news your average American gets is pure fairytale.
Why do Republicans create a fake strawman, then gleefully attack the strawman. They got no arguments so create an extreme version which takes a tiny grain of truth but highly misrepresents it , then attack it relentlessly to prove some sort of moral superiority. Screw them man.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
If bamboo burns like wood, it must be a witch.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Let me guess... China has to go along not because it's in the US's own self-interests to stop North Korea from having nukes but it's for the world. This is for the world's sake and not the US's. This is beyond the US and the betterment of the world. Meaning the US doesn't have to bargain with China on what China gets in return.
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
After Chaz Freeman critic on US china policy in which he said the competition is basically economy and technology and not military But even in military sphere it is just too late to cage China Here is prof Hugh White from ANU university think of those policy
Author: Hugh White, ANU
The US–China rivalry has many dimensions, but at its heart is a strategic contest over primacy in the Western Pacific. Although this contest is being waged on many fronts — including economic, diplomatic and ideological — it is essentially military. China seeks to challenge US leadership in the Western Pacific by opposing the US maritime military supremacy. The United States is trying to resist that challenge and preserve its military preponderance.
Neither side wants a war. Instead, both hope to win by convincing the other side to back off in the face of the other’s evident military power and strategic resolve. In other words, they hope to deter one another.
The United States is in danger of losing this contest because its historically unassailable maritime power is being challenged by China’s growing naval, air and missile forces. US forces remain more powerful overall, but China has many advantages in the Western Pacific — fighting a defensive campaign close to home bases. China’s massive investment in maritime capabilities over the past 25 years has effectively exploited these advantages, so that today it has the potential to exact a heavy toll on US ships and aircraft projecting power towards China.
The United States can no longer expect a swift, cheap victory in a war with China in the Western Pacific. It must expect a long and very costly war — bigger than anything since Vietnam and probably bigger than any war since 1945 with no clear prospect of ultimate victory.
(cont)
US Pacific Deterrence Initiative too little, too late to counter China
10 May 2021Author: Hugh White, ANU
The US–China rivalry has many dimensions, but at its heart is a strategic contest over primacy in the Western Pacific. Although this contest is being waged on many fronts — including economic, diplomatic and ideological — it is essentially military. China seeks to challenge US leadership in the Western Pacific by opposing the US maritime military supremacy. The United States is trying to resist that challenge and preserve its military preponderance.
Neither side wants a war. Instead, both hope to win by convincing the other side to back off in the face of the other’s evident military power and strategic resolve. In other words, they hope to deter one another.
The United States is in danger of losing this contest because its historically unassailable maritime power is being challenged by China’s growing naval, air and missile forces. US forces remain more powerful overall, but China has many advantages in the Western Pacific — fighting a defensive campaign close to home bases. China’s massive investment in maritime capabilities over the past 25 years has effectively exploited these advantages, so that today it has the potential to exact a heavy toll on US ships and aircraft projecting power towards China.
The United States can no longer expect a swift, cheap victory in a war with China in the Western Pacific. It must expect a long and very costly war — bigger than anything since Vietnam and probably bigger than any war since 1945 with no clear prospect of ultimate victory.
(cont)
I'm of the opinion that such a war must and should be a war of conquest; if chinese lives must be lost for the defence of China, then the price for such losses ought to be:
1) The Pacific becomes a Chinese lake.
2) Australia and NZ, Hawaii and Alaska and all the islands in between becomes Chinese territory and must become sinocised.
Such a war would only be the first of perhaps three "punic wars" that must expel white anglo influence from this hemisphere