Miscellaneous News

[TK3600]

I disagree. The multipolar world is a return to exactly the world in which the Monroe Doctrine was born. The unipolar world was a unique aberration in history and any rules, norms, and mores that it formulated will pass with it. If the ship set sail a hundred years ago, it's just reappeared on the horizon and will soon pull into port. Welcome back, history.

The thinking in the Global South isn't so simplistic. They might profess a principled opposition to bullying and imperialism, but their real problem with it is that they're the victims. China is "popular" (and I wouldn't say that's the right word, it's more that it's seen as a valuable and strong partner by the elites of those countries) despite intensive Western propaganda portraying it as a bully - witness the endless stream of intellectual sewage about Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the SCS, etc.

You might argue that that's because China is being slandered and these accusations are untrue, and I agree. But that's beside the point, the point is people believe in China's righteousness here because that's what serves their interests to believe, whether or not China is actually righteous.

China retains its "popularity" in the Global South and I argue that the primary reason is that China isn't bullying them and they benefit economically and strategically by aligning with it. That logic would remain even in the case of genuine Chinese coercive or bellicose behaviour against countries in the region that ally with the US.

That's exactly the way it's always been. That's Statecraft 101. No country has ever tolerated the military presence of a rival in its near abroad if it had the power to change it.

I find it self-serving to believe China is the exception because of an excess of morality. The real reason is that China was too weak to change it and could only accept it. Increasingly, that's no longer the case.

Then they would see what I'm proposing as a just war. I don't advocate doing any more harm than necessary to realize China's just and reasonable core security objectives. If vacating the US necessitates a war, then that war is solely the responsibility of those who denied China justice. Whether or not there is a war is entirely their choice. Even if there is a war, they could stop it immediately with one phone call to the Chinese President agreeing to remove the US military from their territory.

That's your opinion and I don't think it's widespread among the Chinese public today, let alone 15-20 years in the future as China grows ever more wealthy and powerful.

Nobody will be happier than I am if the US just resigns after its alliance system is spontaneously reconfigured due to China's growing wealth and power. That suits me just fine. My question is what if this doesn't happen? I don't think alliance systems just fade away, they're always broken by war. That's my hypothesis and time will tell.

I consider China's policy on Taiwan a dangerous holdover from a period of poverty and weakness, just like its minimal nuclear deterrent policy was until very recently. China is not telegraphing a willingness to fight over its core national security issues, it's telegraphing a willingness to fight over one specific issue.

What happens should Taiwan return to the PRC while these other issues remain unaddressed? Some countries in the region would think they could take every liberty with China because the Taiwan thorn has been pulled from its side.

What China should do is telegraph a willingness to fight over its core security and sovereignty issues, of which Taiwan is one and not the totality. That's very different from telegraphing any "bullying syndrome."

They don't have the right to say no on a very narrow set of issues that affect China's most fundamental security interests. The core of our disagreement is that I believe this is well within a superpower's prerogative and you don't.

I wouldn't put it in overwrought language like "genocide", but I was quite concerned until recently about China's strategic deterrent. Recent events have been very reassuring.

I agree. I usually agree with @manqiangrexue but this time is a rare time that I do not. Moral grandstanding has no place in geopolitics. Chinese Tang emperors learned this since ancient time, times when "China was strong and useless to challenge" like he described. 夷狄，禽兽也，畏威而不怀德。It roughly translate into "Barbarians, they fear might yet never appreciate mercy." China should adopt its stance according to culture of people they deal with. The nomadic cultures are highly hierarchical. If you show gestures of good will and talk morality they interpret it as weakness, and you should be robbed. If you beat them up, they would happily submit to you because they respect your might. What one consider as moral differ across culture.

The same applies today to highly hierchical cultures like Japan. They were nuked, but for most part they respect US. US demonstrated its might, and they submitted. They live happily under US. For countries like these some moderate 'bullying' is needed. They will be happy to live under stronger nations worthy of respect. Then there are also peaceful countries like China, those country should be treated with moral and respect because that is what their culture consider as valuable.

 

[OTCDebunker]

I've been wanting to mention something for a while now, but got some stuff come up in work that was more mentally challenging than I thought so I wanted to give myself some breathing space in my head.

Now seems like a good time to just move us all towards a more 'pacified' conversation.

My subject?

MILLWRIGHTS!!!

Before we talk about what a Millwright is in case you don't know we'll just go over what a Millwright is not.

A Millwright is not someone who works with windmills nor is it someone who does millwork/mill cabinetry. The similarity ends as soon as you see the word "mill" that's literally the only thing all 3 of those things have in common.

So what exactly is a millwright?

A better term that is sometimes used is something along the lines of "Industrial Maintenance Technician". In a nutshell, a Millwright is the guy who does the actual repairing, fixing, and/or maintenancing of all the manufacturing equipment, machines, and/or industrial machinery.

All those factories that make cars. Who fixes the actual stuff inside of the factory/manufacturing line? Millwrights. All those factories who make chocolate? Millwrights fix that stuff. All those factories who make paper? Millwrights. Factories that make guns? Millwrights. Factories that make toys? Millwrights again. Furniture factories? Millwrights! Medicinal/pharma manufacturers? Millwrights!

Millwrights, millwrights, MILLLLLLLLLLL-WRIGHTTTTTTTSSSSSS!!!

It's millwrights all the way down.

At this point I will pause temporarily and say that if you didn't know what a millwright was don't blame yourself. There's literally people who've worked construction 6 years, 8 years, 14 years, etc. since high school and they don't know what a millwright is.

Take note of what I just said above because it'll become relevant later on, but yes think about that for a second. Think about how utterly pathetic and degraded the American blue collar/industrial realm is if even other blue collar workers who've spent their whole working lives until their 30's don't even know just what a millwright is exactly.

America has a terrifyingly bad shortage of millwrights

And of course since we're all on SDF we all know that military stuff and things requires some pretty damn high advanced manufacturing and industrializing of that economy thing. And that's only during peacetime.

In wartime, this need to manufacture and really maximize the producitivity of your industrialization gets amplified to a ridiculous amount. Far more than what was necessary before.

One of those things that will need to be increased is the number of millwrights and good fucking millwrights!

That's right boys and girls. You don't really think that a millwright who worksfor companies making printing paper or cardboard boxes is going to be anywhere near as good or have the right skillset as the guy who is working on the factory that's making hypersonic missiles...or the defensive missiles needed to (try) shoot them down right?

Because that's now a second problem with millwrights here in the good ole' U.S. of Ayyyyyyyyyy

Remember how I said that even experienced blue collar workers don't even know just what a millwright is?

Ya imagine how bad the lack of high-skilled and high-technical knowledge and qualifications is for the kind of millwrights you need in order to make sure that all those factories that are supposed to be making F35, THAAD radars, Patriot and Tomahawk missiles, stinger missiles, etc. is.

For millwrights to successfully diagnose, troubleshoot, fix, repair, replace, maintenance, calibrate, and just overall understand what the fuck is going on in that big ole' complex expensive super machinery that's making all those million-dollar weapons he should be extremely proficient in things like vibration analysis for industrial applications, dynamic balancing, rotating equipment, hydraulics, etc.

Well guess what? most manufacturing and therefore most millwrights by extension in America are not going to have that under their belt. Precisely because they've spent the last 50 years de-industrializing. They've spent 50 years making sure that more and more of their factories are for simple and easy stuff like chocolate and candy factories, dog chew toys (lol at the irony of how they used to talk so much shit about how China is only good for manufacturing dog toys), raw steel (I should've bought U.S. Steel stock 18 months ago...fuck man), cars (ok fine I'll give the victory to them on this one), lumber, packaging (not so much like bubble wrap but think of the tools that you need to put packaging materials onto the product), hand tools (milwaukee, dewalt), other food and drinks.

But look at what's missing there.

Look at all the stuff there and how much do each individual thing cost to make you think? Pennies? Dollars? Maybe some thousands or barely past $10,000?

They're missing the stuff that costs six figures just to make at the minimum. They are missing stuff that costs millions to make at the minimum.

At the very least there's not a whole lot of American places where that happens.

Ya well guess what? It's the millwrights in those factories whom are going to be most necessary for the war when you need to churn out thousands multipled by thousands of munitions and ordinance and all that military stuff that they are so happy to brag about.

Now before anyone thinks that you can just go ahead and either do without millwrights, quickly train millwrights to a high level of skill, or import millwrights from like canada or wherever consider this.

The problem with that idea is that it's going to take quite some time to find the necessary quantity and quality of millwrights needed to make sure that you are able to operate those factories at or near full maximum productivity. And you will need that when fighting against the world's oldest surviving civilization.

How long? Apprenticeships take 4-5 years depending on place, but truthfully nobody gets an apprenticeship as a greenhorn. Most people start in some other related-career such as machinist, mechanic, factory worker, etc. and then an employer looks for a "Helper" position (which sucks at pay btw), and then after a year or so of that you formally begin your apprenticeship. At w;hich point 4-5 years later you become a journeyman...which means you are as good of a millwright as a brand new engineer or brand new lawyer or possibly (and I mean very possibly) a brand new doctor. In other words, someone absolutely not good enough for the needs of military manufacturing.

Quite frankly, it will take years to train an already licensed or Red Sealed Millwright into one who's competent enough to work well at a military manufacturing place, and that's just one person. You need a bunch.

So during this whole time that you can't manufacture all those military things and stuff to full capacity China will be taking out plenty of NATO/Western military things and stuff.

What this translates to in real life is that China simply has to do stuff like massive oversaturation of American and Lackeys defenses and then watch as the Americans and Lackeys get overrun or flattened by overwhelming Chinese firepower. They are helpless to do anything because the Americans will try to increase military manufacturing to the level needed to wage war on this scale. They will gleefully and happily tell themselves "iN W0rLD WAR tU wE MaDe a BAJILLI0n-GAZiLLion things and stufF" at first...and walk right into a trap of their own making. This trap being called "tripping over your own two damn feet while walking on perfectly solid and even ground that has no obstructions to cause you to make such a stupid mistake as tripping over your own two damn feet".

As soon as they ramp up production those machines will break down like no other.

That's what happens to industrial machinery. It's the same reason why you can't fly F35, J20, SU57 too long without lots of manpower maintenace and repair hours. it's just what expensive machinery is like.

And BAM!!! Mistake is made since there's not enough millwrights to keep up with all the repairs necessary. Production will slow badly at some places or even outright be stopped. Thus the flow of munitions, ordinance, equipment, weapons, etc. will stop too. Things that might or might not have been able to stop a chinese missile from blowing up some marines who posting up tiktoks about how angry they are that they have to kill brown arabs instead of yellow chinese...same soldiers who aren't even white themselves (note that it's for that reason <<<---- that I no longer have any sympathy for even poor non-white Americans now...they happily would send Chinese in America to concentration camps because it would mean that they are now the oppressors and not the victims. It's like a kid who is bullied and then a new kid comes and now everyone else bullies the new kid and the old victim is the biggest bully of them all because he knows that if its not the new kid it goes back to being him).

Anyways, this is just a high level overview of it.

I won't have everything covered, but I do believe I have enough to know that America will definitely experience a rude awakening with the lack of people qualified to actually fix the damn machines and factories once they are used to their 100% full potential whenever they want to do a false flag incident.

I mean just look at the UAW victory recently. Those kinds of jobs and workers are not highly skilled at all. And yet there obviously is not enough of them to go around for the companies because if there were enough workers than the employers would simply hire non-union and give the finger to the union.

If you can't even fix the shortage of low-skilled, low-talented workers than you won't be able to fix the shortage with high-skilled ones.

 

[antiterror13]

Israel will just like other Western countries would come up with made up nonsens to ban BYD like Huawei anyway, GCC market would more than make up for lost Israeli market it seems Chinese leadership has decided putting up with the toxic relationship with west is not worth it anymore China is almost self sufficient in technology and that was the biggest factor behind China's patience in the past.

I understand that there are many cooperation between China and Israel in China, especially in water conservation in agriculture industry which clearly Israel is the leader in the world ..... what would happen then?

China exports to Israel is not small but not big either US$16.5B

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And Israel exports to China in 2022 is "only" US$4.6B ..

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Clearly China is benefitting more

 

[Blitzo]

I am certain that there were members that support Russia by saying Russian attack on civilian infrastructure is justified and got permanent ban. I remember their positions were that in time of war attacking civilian infrastructure is a way to subdue your enemies. The MODS' positions back then are anyway suggesting, agreeing and justifying attack on civilian infrastructure wouldn't be tolerated because it is war crimes. But I have seemed plenty of members suggesting, agreeing, and justifying attack on Palestinian civilian infrastructure because this is a war but no ban hammer.

Well I do not recall those bans as I probably did not carry them out, and frankly if it were me then I think the Ukraine thread wouldn't exist at all. I've kept my hands relatively clean of moderating the Ukraine thread to begin with.


If you want to talk about civilian infrastructure in conflict, well this forum often has discussions about conventional conflicts where the targeting of civilian infrastructure is acknowledged as an element of war (often in the Taiwan contingency, against Taiwan), and that has not resulted in bans either.

In this case, the permanent ban was due to the advocacy of an obvious, clear cut and horrendous war crime, and I would advise you to stop complaining about other past bans if you felt people were wronged, because even if you disagreed with past bans, it is immaterial to the bans that were done on this occasion.

If you continue issuing these posts then I will be unable to perceive this as anything other than challenging a moderator decision in making these specific bans, and trust me you do not want to be the one holding the bag being seen as defending two people, one of whom was calling for doing to every Japanese city what Japan did to Nanjing, or to someone making racist, sexist and incel-esque remarks which lowers the dignity of this forum.


If you want to complain about past moderation decisions done by other people, this is not the time.

I've chosen to not write this in moderator red because I ultimately want people to see a track record of just the sheer audacity of what the banned individuals posted, and for you to hopefully recognize that you are really barking up the wrong tree here.

 

[H2O]

How long? Apprenticeships take 4-5 years depending on place, but truthfully nobody gets an apprenticeship as a greenhorn. Most people start in some other related-career such as machinist, mechanic, factory worker, etc. and then an employer looks for a "Helper" position (which sucks at pay btw), and then after a year or so of that you formally begin your apprenticeship. At w;hich point 4-5 years later you become a journeyman...which means you are as good of a millwright as a brand new engineer or brand new lawyer or possibly (and I mean very possibly) a brand new doctor. In other words, someone absolutely not good enough for the needs of military manufacturing.

Quite frankly, it will take years to train an already licensed or Red Sealed Millwright into one who's competent enough to work well at a military manufacturing place, and that's just one person. You need a bunch.
...
As soon as they ramp up production those machines will break down like no other.
...
I mean just look at the UAW victory recently. Those kinds of jobs and workers are not highly skilled at all. And yet there obviously is not enough of them to go around for the companies because if there were enough workers than the employers would simply hire non-union and give the finger to the union.

If you can't even fix the shortage of low-skilled, low-talented workers than you won't be able to fix the shortage with high-skilled ones.

Agreed. The US will need to find a more efficient path for a 'greenhorn' to get an apprenticeship position. IMO, the education system at the high school level needs to be revamped which is a tall order especially in the US. There needs to be people on the lookout for potential candidates and guide them towards the Trades. I could be wrong but I believe the European model is similar to what I mentioned. Anyone here from Europe is free to correct me.

However, there are lots of problems when you're dealing with a union shop. I support unions but there are days where the union leadership needs to get their asses kicked.

 

[manqiangrexue]

I disagree. The multipolar world is a return to exactly the world in which the Monroe Doctrine was born. The unipolar world was a unique aberration in history and any rules, norms, and mores that it formulated will pass with it. If the ship set sail a hundred years ago, it's just reappeared on the horizon and will soon pull into port. Welcome back, history.

The difference is not multipolar vs unipolar; the difference is that 150 years ago, a country can do whatever horrible deed it wants and no one except the affected would know or care. Today, whatever you do, it's immediately on the news for the world to see and sent to the UN for judgement. One can argue that the UN is toothless against a superpower but this kind of wear against ones reputation is what we are happy to see happen to the US. We should not pretend that it doesn't matter when it happens to China, a nation that is still in its infancy of superpower status.

The thinking in the Global South isn't so simplistic. They might profess a principled opposition to bullying and imperialism, but their real problem with it is that they're the victims. China is "popular" (and I wouldn't say that's the right word, it's more that it's seen as a valuable and strong partner by the elites of those countries) despite intensive Western propaganda portraying it as a bully - witness the endless stream of intellectual sewage about Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan, the SCS, etc.

You might argue that that's because China is being slandered and these accusations are untrue, and I agree. But that's beside the point, the point is people believe in China's righteousness here because that's what serves their interests to believe, whether or not China is actually righteous.

China retains its "popularity" in the Global South and I argue that the primary reason is that China isn't bullying them and they benefit economically and strategically by aligning with it. That logic would remain even in the case of genuine Chinese coercive or bellicose behaviour against countries in the region that ally with the US.

This is a very fancy way of saying that nobody in the global south knows or cares about right or wrong. It's a poor excuse to write yourself an empty check to do whatever you want and it's not supported by fact. When the world voted on America's oppression of Cuba, those countries that voted were not the ones bullied. Same with Gaza. But they voted against it anyway because people do know what is right from wrong; they're just sometimes forced to turn a blind eye by bribe and threat, but they remember it and they know what you're doing. You can buy someone's actions transactionally but you can't buy their true support.

That's exactly the way it's always been. That's Statecraft 101. No country has ever tolerated the military presence of a rival in its near abroad if it had the power to change it.

This is the 21st century. The power to change it no longer means declaring war against a country's sovereign right and daring the world to do anything about. Once again, China is only in its infancy of superpower status; if it acted at your directions, the whole world, not just the Western world, would fear the abomination of a tyrant it should become should it truly achieve unrivalled power.

I find it self-serving to believe China is the exception because of an excess of morality. The real reason is that China was too weak to change it and could only accept it. Increasingly, that's no longer the case.

It's not an excess of morality; it is common human decency in modern times. Those who violate it usually do so out of desperation and lack of other options, signalling the dusk of a superpower.

Then they would see what I'm proposing as a just war. I don't advocate doing any more harm than necessary to realize China's just and reasonable core security objectives. If vacating the US necessitates a war, then that war is solely the responsibility of those who denied China justice. Whether or not there is a war is entirely their choice. Even if there is a war, they could stop it immediately with one phone call to the Chinese President agreeing to remove the US military from their territory.

The just war would be on the opposing country's behalf. They have the right to host whomever they want on their own land. Your gangster logic is exactly what people hear when they're extorted by mobsters. "This is your fault. I don't want to break your fingers or set your home on fire or kill your family. You can stop it all just by signing 51% of your company over to me. If you don't, it's really like you breaking your own fingers and setting your own house on fire with your poor family in it. The responsibility would be on your hands, totally your choice. Why do you want to do that to your family?" Chinese people are not stupid; we don't see your gangster logic as any kind of justice.

That's your opinion and I don't think it's widespread among the Chinese public today, let alone 15-20 years in the future as China grows ever more wealthy and powerful.

The CCP never talks like you. The Chinese people are always taught to hate imperialism. Chinese culture has an exuberance of sympathy for the weak, poor and oppressed. We despise bullies and when we see them, we hunt them on the internet until they have no place to hide. This new gangster persona you cast on China is in your own mind. We're not that kind of people. And as a matter of fact, I'm a much more aggressive person than average in the Chinese population. There are lots of Chinese people who want to just get along with the US and even some who would rather let Taiwan go than fight. Most Chinese aren't even political and they will go wherever the pay and standard of living is highest. If you rely on most Chinese people being nastier than me, you are up Shit Creek without a paddle.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Nobody will be happier than I am if the US just resigns after its alliance system is spontaneously reconfigured due to China's growing wealth and power. That suits me just fine. My question is what if this doesn't happen? I don't think alliance systems just fade away, they're always broken by war. That's my hypothesis and time will tell.

They can resign or keep at it and be made irrelevent like some small North Korean enclave with a base in Cuba. Nobody cares. This is the level of power China would need to achieve anyway if it were to act like bully king as you suggest. The truth is, when China has that kind of power, America won't matter anymore in Asia. They're retreat if they're smart and conserve their energy for nation building but if they're not, they can be there and be irrelevent and embarrassed. It won't make a difference by that time.

I consider China's policy on Taiwan a dangerous holdover from a period of poverty and weakness, just like its minimal nuclear deterrent policy was until very recently. China is not telegraphing a willingness to fight over its core national security issues, it's telegraphing a willingness to fight over one specific issue.

China's policy on Taiwan is the willingness to trade every major city with the US in a nuclear tit for tat if the situation calls for it. What about this is weakness?

What happens should Taiwan return to the PRC while these other issues remain unaddressed? Some countries in the region would think they could take every liberty with China because the Taiwan thorn has been pulled from its side.

LOLOL That event would show them that China has already beaten the US in Asia and siding with America is setting yourself up to lose.

What China should do is telegraph a willingness to fight over its core security and sovereignty issues, of which Taiwan is one and not the totality. That's very different from telegraphing any "bullying syndrome."

It's currently doing that. Taiwan, SCS, those are China's sovereignty issues and we are absolutely telegraphing a willingness to fight for them. Dictating whom other Asian countries host and form partnerships with is the epitome of bully syndrome and not at all China's sovereignty but a denial of others' sovereignty.

They don't have the right to say no on a very narrow set of issues that affect China's most fundamental security interests. The core of our disagreement is that I believe this is well within a superpower's prerogative and you don't.

Sovereignty always trumps interests. No matter what, you cannot violate your neigbors' rights for your own interests. That should be common basic knowledge. Your neighbor has the right to invite his friend to his house even if you hate the dude. Your neighbor has the right to BBQ in his back yard even if you hate the smell. None of these things give you proper cause to go over there and bash his head in. How is this difficult for you to understand morally? There are things you can do to influence his actions. You can say that if he bans his shitty friend then you will invest $10M in his company, but if he doesn't, you will invest that $10M in his rival's company and drive him out of business. You can tell him that if he BBQ's then you will use a high powered fan that will blow all the smoke onto his house and cover it in soot. But you cannot threaten to beat his ass for those things. A true superpower has many many tools to opt for before turning into a desperate raging ape beating on a smaller country for exercising its proper soveriegn rights. As a matter of fact, a China that invades Japan or Korea over whom they choose to host is like a man who beats a woman because she rejected him for a different mate. It's pathetic.

And lastly before I move on, China is a very unique country in that it possesses much much more innate potential and power than any other nation. It is heads and shoulders taller than any other nation hopes to become. With our massive population filled with people who are on top of the world in intellect, work ethic and ambition, we can stay on top with what we have. We can govern fairly and justly and expect that our enemies will see the pointlessness of opposing us. This is unlike other civilizations that can only remain powerful through imperialism and stealing the powers of others simply because their own potential is not enough and will eventually be overtaken. I urge you to understand China's true power and be confident that it has the ability to rule justly rather than copy the doctrines of lesser historical powers that must resort to slavery and imperialism to fill their own weaknesses.

I agree. I usually agree with @manqiangrexue but this time is a rare time that I do not. Moral grandstanding has no place in geopolitics. Chinese Tang emperors learned this since ancient time, times when "China was strong and useless to challenge" like he described. 夷狄，禽兽也，畏威而不怀德。It roughly translate into "Barbarians, they fear might yet never appreciate mercy." China should adopt its stance according to culture of people they deal with. The nomadic cultures are highly hierarchical. If you show gestures of good will and talk morality they interpret it as weakness, and you should be robbed. If you beat them up, they would happily submit to you because they respect your might. What one consider as moral differ across culture.

This is a different world. To rule this world for a long time, you must be just. The downfall of the US is that it promotes peace and stability at the expense of justice, thus accumulating hatred for itself. Eventually, it became too much and people began to obsess with coming up with ways to overthrow it. The global south is on China's side because of America's unjust behavior. China itself developed all our powers, painfully determined, investing resources in the military and technology even when large portions of the population were impoverished because America has shown that it is a bully that must be put off by force. China, decades ago, would have loved to be an ally to a fair and just America that supports Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan, respecting China on the global stage and seeking no dominion over Asia. That kind of US would have kept China weak, fat and happy. It was the biggest mistake of America to awaken and drive China's transformation from a huge banana republic into the rising superpower it is today by acting like a bully just because it could. This is not a mistake I want to see China make.

The same applies today to highly hierchical cultures like Japan. They were nuked, but for most part they respect US. US demonstrated its might, and they submitted. They live happily under US. For countries like these some moderate 'bullying' is needed. They will be happy to live under stronger nations worthy of respect. Then there are also peaceful countries like China, those country should be treated with moral and respect because that is what their culture consider as valuable.

Japan knows what they did. They didn't get bombed out of nowhere. They know they started it with Pearl Harbor and even though the textbooks try to hide it, in the modern digital world, the Japanese know they started a horrible war that the Americans finished. Their respect for America would be different if they were peacefully minding their own businesses when American A-bombs were dropped on them subjugating them.

 

[vincent]

America has a terrifyingly bad shortage of millwrights

There is a perfect solution:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[KYli]

If you want to talk about civilian infrastructure in conflict, well this forum often has discussions about conventional conflicts where the targeting of civilian infrastructure is acknowledged as an element of war (often in the Taiwan contingency, against Taiwan), and that has not resulted in bans either.

In this case, the permanent ban was due to the advocacy of an obvious, clear cut and horrendous war crime, and I would advise you to stop complaining about other past bans if you felt people were wronged, because even if you disagreed with past bans, it is immaterial to the bans that were done on this occasion.

I have to respectfully disagree that past bans are consistent or clear cut as you just describe above but it is not my intention to advocate for these two members or in anyway that I think the ban is not justified.

If you continue issuing these posts then I will be unable to perceive this as anything other than challenging a moderator decision in making these specific bans, and trust me you do not want to be the one holding the bag being seen as defending two people, one of whom was calling for doing to every Japanese city what Japan did to Nanjing, or to someone making racist, sexist and incel-esque remarks which lowers the dignity of this forum.

Again. Firstly, I don't have a problem with your bans. Secondly, I have no intention to defend these two members. Lastly, I have been here almost 20 years and understand the rules perfectly.

When I speak up about moderation issues, I already understand the consequences. No need to issue a threat to me, I have no problem if you decided to permanent ban me. I speak what I have in mind and is willing to accept the consequences. It is just a discussion forum why would you think I should fear anything if you imposed forum rules to ban me. Rule is rule. If you think I am challenging your moderation authority, just do what you have to do. Again, I don't have a problem with it.

If you want to complain about past moderation decisions done by other people, this is not the time.

I've chosen to not write this in moderator red because I ultimately want people to see a track record of just the sheer audacity of what the banned individuals posted, and for you to hopefully recognize that you are really barking up the wrong tree here.

I don't have a problem with your moderation but I disagree with the fact that you can totally disavow any responsibility. As a forum, all moderators are a team and each of you shares some degree of other moderators' actions. Otherwise, you would have inconsistency in enforcing rules and fairness in this forum.

 

[supersnoop]

MILLWRIGHTS!!!

Tim Cook said this a long time ago

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

He was dismissed as indoctrinated by CCP and an adherent of XJP Thought. Just read how that article is written.

The crazy thing is that the article is almost 10 years old. Even China has some staffing issues at factories now.

All politicians say is decouple and ban Huawei, but have zero comprehensive plan to increase industrial output. It’s too long term and therefore unlikely to win enough votes. Much easier to ban Huawei and investigate Chinese academics.