Miscellaneous News

Chevalier said:

Well it gets to a point where the people of the nation who support these policies must be held to acccount by what Ghengis khan called “the flail of God”, after all the Germans who elected and supported the Nazis would inevitably have to pay for it with fire bombs and mass rape and ruin. Why should the Anglo Americans be any different? The laws of manifest destiny apply to them as equally as it applied to the native Americans they exterminated.

Last week, Anglo Americans were so full of spite for China that they took a humorous Ukrainians girl’s tiktok about life in China as a “all of society” attack against them the way the Germans once believed Jews drank Christian blood.

This all do society war does not go unnoticed by zhongnanhai

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Well, as I wrote, that was rhetorical. I’m born here, and’ve lived here all my life; I know full well how stupid “we” are, and am fully aware of what “we“ deserve!
As I’ve written, previously, as the nukes are rainin’ down on AmeriKKKA, I’m goin’ out on my front lawn, laughin’ my ass off, screamin’ out “do y’all feel superior, now, crackers”!

james smith esq said:

Alright, Howeitat! You are taking this obsession far too seriously. I couldn’t care less about the third-rate merchant nations you have a need to idealize.
I hope your vacation to Dubai works out for you!
Bye!

Click to expand...

how exactly are they third rate nations.
you are either jealous of there wealth and soft power or some misconceptions.
third rate nations are those whose societies have internal contradictions, always look to outside and they dont even know it. These countries do donate alot. you would be surprised how far the length of red carpet goes in Central Asia. now the conditions are extremely favorable for Gulf countries to further increase there wealth. Even Iran is increasing trade with them but they have given certain other task to it. The great power status of a country is measured how it distribute tasks.

KYli said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Excellent news. I’ve been saying in the Economics thread that China should restrict data reports of various industries. Information security is critical to national security.

FairAndUnbiased said:

Extreme individualism? This one, admittedly, China can't beat them at their own game. But that's OK. This one might actually be corrosive to China itself so best not to touch it.

Click to expand...

Imo Americans are not really that individualistic at all. They have an aversion to "communist" stuff because they have been implanted with pavlovian triggers against certain phrases.

For example, many Americans would react with outrage if asked to give up something "for the union". But if you just asked them to give up something "for the company" they would happily do it.

Americans are very willing to tolerate personal discomfort for the greater good of the group, as long as you present the idea to them in the language they like. Just look at COVID19 as an example. It was accepted that "keeping America strong" and "the economy" was acceptable even through many people lost lives or suffered long term sickness.

Americans are basically right wing, national level collectivists. Mainland Chinese are family level collectivists or neutral individualists, looking mostly out for the "in group" rather than everyone in the whole society.

I think the true extreme individualists are only ones like HK Chinese, they literally don't care about the bigger picture at all and only about personal comfort (broadly speaking). And obviously that's not a desirable trait.

A nasty private jet crash in Malaysia today.



The incident was recorded on vehicle dashcams. Aircraft was a Beechcraft Model 290 private jet. At the time of the crash, 10 people were reportedly killed. 8 people were on board the plane including a politician. 2 people were killed on the ground. Someone in a car, and another on a motorbike. There was no "Mayday" call from the plane to ATC, so the crash is under investigation.

Plane crashes are not common in Malaysia. So this is a big national news there.

Representatives from Saudi Arabia and China signed several housing and infrastructure agreements worth $1.33 billion on the sidelines of the Saudi-Chinese Business Forum hosted by Beijing on 16 August.

“[A total of] 12 agreements and memorandums of understanding were signed between the Saudi side and Chinese companies in the fields of infrastructure and financing,” Saudi Minister of Municipal and Rural Affairs and Housing Majid al-Hogail, who presided over Wednesday's forum, said in a tweet.


Although the names of the companies involved were not made public, a press release from the Saudi government revealed that Hogail met with representatives of the Chinese state-owned investment conglomerate CITIC to discuss “construction in Saudi Arabia and green housing technology.”

“These partnerships are set to foster advancements in key areas, including five focused on real estate developments, signaling a promising trajectory for the mutual growth of the Kingdom and China,” the state-run Saudi Press Agency (SPA) said on Thursday.

During his speech at the forum, Hogail stressed Riyadh’s “dedication to enhancing its partnership with China” as he spoke about several recent achievements, including the summits led by Chinese President Xi Jinping's visit to Saudi Arabia in December.

“With the construction of over 300,000 housing units across 17 Saudi cities, covering an area of over 150 million square meters., and valued at over [$26.66 billion], the kingdom holds significant investment opportunities,” Hogail emphasized.

Saudi Arabia has significantly increased its economic cooperation with China over the past few years as the kingdom moves away from Washington's sphere of influence.

In June, during the 10th Arab-China Business Conference in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Investment signed $10 billion worth of investment agreements with Chinese companies. Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan said in a speech during the conference that China remains the largest trading partner of Arab countries, with the volume of trade exchange reaching $430 billion in 2022, up 31 percent from the previous year.

Furthermore, Saudi Aramco acquired a $3.4 billion stake in the Chinese petrochemical firm Rongsheng Petrochemical Co. Ltd last month.

The two countries are also in talks to allow exchange-traded funds (ETFs) to list on each other's stock exchanges.

FriedRiceNSpice said:

Did Canada act on any of those accusations? Short sighted move.

Click to expand...

Did you miss the whole "create the condition first" meme?

Seems like a significant development. I guess they are talking about Japan?

In any case, 0 + 0 still equals 0.

DFA chief: PH eyes visiting forces agreement with ‘major ally near China’​

Click to expand...

Metro Manila (CNN Philippines, August 16) — Foreign Affairs Secretary Enrique Manalo disclosed that the Philippine government is now holding discussions with another country on a possible new visiting forces agreement (VFA).

Click to expand...

“We have the VFA with the United States and Australia. We are not closed for similar arrangements with friendly partners who wish to do so. We are in discussion now, a major partner, near China,” the DFA chief added.

Click to expand...

Overbom said:

Seems like a significant development. I guess they are talking about Japan?

In any case, 0 + 0 still equals 0.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

What if it's INDIA? After all, the Philippines is already using the Brahmos missiles proudly exported from India not to mention that retired military officers from India made recent visits to Taiwan in a not so subtle signaling to the Chinese that India can and will make incursions into the South China Sea, Taiwan, and East China Sea which are some of the most contentious issues for China. Plus, India is trying to insert itself as the other giant power in Asia that is not scared nor intimated by China one bit.

Eventine said:

My prediction is that the EU, the US, and their allies will, in the long-term, make use of tariffs and protectionism to prevent China from gaining market share in their countries. Their logic will be that, since the EU, the US, and their allies constitute a larger share of the global economic pie than China does, it is they who will come out ahead should the two stop trading. Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I don't think there's any way this can go outside of another Cold War. A such, I've been thinking about what it'll take for China to win it.

Click to expand...

Depends on the measurement. Raw GDP? Yes. Key industrial outputs? No. They simply pay more for same shit due to exchange rates. Chinese on average is now wealthier than average Europeans. Americans are wealthier, but only to the extent the elites are obscenely rich and the average life quality of average American are worse by multiple measures such as life expectancy and indebtedness. Big press X to doubt moment.

Eventine said:

It seems obvious to me that China and its close partners - Russia, North Korea, Iran - are insufficient to form an alliance of equal power to the Western alliance. They simply don't own enough of the world's land, resources, and markets. The rest of the Global South are also not likely to rally behind China, but constitute third parties, where China's influence will be challenged by the Western alliance. Their best play under game theory is to side with whoever gives them the better deal for the time being; and to keep their diplomacy flexible. Counting on the Global South to take China's side is not wise.

So how do you win, when you can't bring together an alliance of equal power, and must expect most of the world to act in a mercenary way? We have to look to China's advantages: its large, highly productive population, its cultural preference for education, its favorable view towards technology, its relative lack of self-sabotaging ideologies, and the ability of its government to mobilize national resources towards strategic goals. These are key to China's ability to compete and win against the Western alliance.

Click to expand...

Well for one these are partners, not alliances, so they are not comparable to NATO. But if you insist to compare them the assessment is wrong. Russia is literally the largest country by far, that is a lot of land. China is also a huge country. Most of Asia is bigger than western Europe and North America by quite a bit. It is the Europeans who are low on resources. Most of NATO resources comes from new world like North America and Australia. The rest are sourced from global south like Africa, Middle East. Meanwhile China and his partners are sitting on some of the best resource rich regions. Countries like Russia, China have near monopoly on much of the minerals, and more than half of oils (Russia, Saudi Arabia). The rest of resources are in global south like Africa which China has bigger influence on.

Eventine said:

The best strategy, in my view, is to build upon those advantages. Population must come first - China's greatest advantage over the West has been its larger, more productive population. It cannot lose this advantage to poor demographics management. The first order of business for the CCP has to be to restore Chinese fertility rates to sustainable levels. The Western alliance is collectively dying with a TFR of around 1.5, on average, so China doesn't actually need a miracle 2.1. It just needs a TFR around 1.7 or 1.8 to out last them, which it actually used to have in 2017. So it should be achievable.

Click to expand...

That is silly. Western alliance has more population than China. I know you mean well but even you are falling into the "China is beating us only because they are bigger population" propaganda. Combined population of Japan, North America, West Europe has more people than China, that is before you start including willing colonial soldiers like Philippine, India. The fact is average Chinese is more productive than western person, despite the population disadvantage. Furthermore western TFR may be low, but the population trajectory is not going down due to much higher immigration rates.

Eventine said:

The second critical link is education and technology. China's already doing a pretty solid job, here, but it could do more to incentivize science and engineering. A major problem is there's too much "dead money" stuck in rent seeking industries that generate no strategic value, like investment housing and foreign luxury brands. While it's easier said than done, the Chinese government must pop the property bubble and direct investments towards productive industries, even if it means economic pain the short term. It should also continue to increase incentives for young scientists, engineers, and educators.

Click to expand...

Back to topic of China's strength. The strength is the government. China has not always been the industrial powerhouse and well off country it is now. You paid attention to those, but missed what brought those in in first place. The superior government industrial policy is the one bringing China to a tech power and high education, as well as the Asian culture of education and hard work. The government also played a key role on where do the newly generated wealth go. Chinese government is succesful at directing new money into investment for future, as opposed to speculation. Ultimately government is central to everything you mentioned, but there is no mention of it as the key strength.

Eventine said:

The above is not meant to tell the Chinese government how to do its job, but rather it is a list of the qualities that I will be looking for in the years to come as the second Cold War progresses. Obviously, it's not an exhaustive list, and it could well be that I'm wrong on what matters - but hey, we all have opinions; and these are mine for what it'll take for China to win against the Western alliance.

Click to expand...

Again, I can tell you meant well, but these strategies are based on almost entirely false assumptions.