India is learning from its teacher: 19th century Britain. Modern India is the direct legal successor of British Raj.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Bro major railway project had been affected, all of them are critical in the economic development in the countryside. There are two reason for the delay, First because of covid and second the Chinese intentionally withheld the release after the election, so that they can gauge where the political wind is heading.
They invited Marcos to see if they can trust the guy and the Chinese were disappointed. They look at him as indecisive and a snake, so they decided to wait for the next president in 2028 and move on.
Lol! At least Britain was a world industrial leader in the 19th century. But you're right, India is applying whatever it can grasp from 19th century Britain for the 21st century. The result: India is not even close to becoming an industrial leader in this day and age. The 21st century that Jai Hinds claim to belong to India and India only.
Judging by government and media priorities, it appears the west is ruled by Zionists, homosexuals, and pederasts or a combination of all three.
Every Asian and Chinese medical student who was turned away from the Ivy League medical schools due to race should note that those Israeli doctors in that letter most likely got their schooling in the US.
I suppose those Israeli doctors didn't take the Hippocratic Oath... or maybe they took the N4z1 version of the oath.
They really became the very same group of people that unleashed Holocaust against their ancestors. Utterly despicable.
Last edited:
It’s highly probably they gained admittance thanks to the Slow March of Jewish infiltration into academia, not unlike Indians nepotistically hiring their own cousins and people into positions. The trope of Jewish intelligence is like that of Mossad being the best intelligence agency in the world: a myth.
Borrells garden now has to admit that despite Anglo American speculative attacks on the Chinese share market, that China will still outgrow the entire western world.
30-40% of New Delhi pollution between October and November comes from crop burning. This is after banning it last year with a decline of 40% of annual burning.
Definitely 100% Iran now. Unless it was a lie, I doubt they would be calling the “Mediterranean Sea” as entering the Middle East. However, what the US is doing right now is hugely provocative by telling the Iranians they send an submarine into the Persian Gulf.
It's not just incentives. Vietnam has a skilled labour shortage
This is especially true for anything that might require University education like engineering staff.
China, Taiwan, and USA are all fighting for semiconductor staff, so it would be difficult for Vietnam to also be competitive.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
No, there are two dimensions to it. The first dimension is legal. If discussing the legal dimension, then international trade cannot be conflated to domestic law. But morally (to answer the question of whether something constitutes bullying), there are many comparisons that can be drawn. You drew the legal comparision asking if I can discriminate against Jewish customers in my business in the US. The comparison is a failure because you mixed domestic law with international trade in a legal comparison. But my comparison of boycotting a business in protest to its owner is based on a moral standpoint and perfectly valid.
No, they do morally, not legally. Your movie example was awful and your Jewish discrimination example is awful. Your Bruce Lee example was so terrible it completely ignored the fact that he was defending against imperialism occurring in his own country to try to counter whether inclusion/exclusion counts as bullying. Your example was so far off it was in outer space.
That was always understood legally, NOT morally.
Some of this is correct and some not. America banning the sale of an item is legally and morally sound; you cannot force someone to sell you anything. But when America posts sanctions on a third country and interdicts their shipping, it is of course and overreach like it did to Iran and to other countries shipping thier arms.
Yes, no problem
Right, they don't apply, but the threat is that if the product is sold to China against American wishes, then they will receive no further shipments from the US thus collapsing their future business. Sometimes, it doesn't even come to that. Sometimes American diplomatic appeal is enough. That is within America's own rights and does not violate China's.
Not sure what this is a response to but it does seem you are here to cry about morals accusing America of bullying China just for witholding its trade and acting within its rights to coerce its partners into withholding trade from China. I'm saying that other than the US pirating shipments and starting color revolutions in countries that don't align with it, its trade and tech wars against China are fair game.
This does not register with me as a reply to anything I've said.
Last edited: