Miscellaneous News

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Irrelevant deflection.
What irrelevant deflection? You yourself used your marriage as a point to reinforce your post. Your point, as expected, fell flat because it doesn't make sense in international relations. There was no deflection, its simply countering your arguments.

So with that settled, lets move on:
Cooperation by definition means you depend on your partner or team for their abilities and contributions. This applies equally to marriages, businesses, society, and international relations.
No it doesn't. Again, relations between countries are different than businesses/society/marriages. The only one that could come a bit close is businesses but even there there are huge differences. Marriages are mostly based on love, society based on cultural outputs mostly, business is mostly about money.
Countries however, is about power. With power, then you can get everything else. Whereas people might get influenced by money/culture/love, countries' biggest concern is power/security. If power is not enough, they wouldn't bat an eye to turn over the table. That's your (one of the many) difference here, hopefully you won't use these flawed comparisons again with this short explanation.

Junior partnership means one partner makes the decisions while the other follows.
No. What you describe is vassalage. I pay attention to what words I am using, and as should you. What you describe is vassalage, what I say is junior (economic/diplomatic) partner. The junior partner won't accept blanket orders from the senior partner, but the senior partner has various tools and ways though to influence the decision making of the junior partner if the senior partner wishes to do so.

So far, you have repeatedly demonstrate a lack of careful reading. First with your NATO post in the beginning which I hadn't mentioned anywhere, then again with this where you describe vassalage, whereas I said junior partner.

In addition you demonstrated your lack of knowledge on International Relations. First with your irrelevant and very bad, I have no idea how this comparison came up to you, marriage-countries comparison in your initial post. And then, when pointed that your comparison was leaking water from everywhere, you countered with a simple "Irrelevant deflection", which also shows lack of accepting a mistake or admission that maybe you made a mistake somewhere. You then doubled down and compared marriages/businesses/society relations with countries which again, is a bad comparison.

That's 2 flaws far. Lack of carefully reading the other party's posts, and lack of knowledge of how international relations work. The second flaw is not bad or anything, my pushback however is generated with how confident you are that your points are correct, and when pushed to explain you throw these bad arguments. In general, being incorrect is ok, being confidently incorrect is the issue

Given that after I made a follow-up post that specifically said where your arguments were lacking, and you responded basically with the same flawed arguments, I don't see any point of moving forward with this convo. No need to spam the thread when one party says he found holes in your arguments, you conveniently ignore it ("irrelevant deflection") or you keep up with the same flawed argument (marriages/society/business - countries relations)
 
Last edited:

Feima

Junior Member
Registered Member
We already know that Xi meeting with Putin is huge. But hey, the Chinese delegates eating KFC is much much much more important!!! Just like Xi's two teacups' power projection!!!

Didn't KFC leave Russia, like many other western brands? Isn't it now a Russian brand named Rostics?
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
Didn't KFC leave Russia, like many other western brands? Isn't it now a Russian brand named Rostics?
The answers:
Perhaps the rebranding of KFC in Russia isn't yet complete, since the sale was only finalized in October last year.
+1000 stores. There is probably a grace period in the sales contract on specifying when they should all be rebranded. In any case, it’s not like KFC will be suing them for using their name anytime soon.
 

canonicalsadhu

Junior Member
Registered Member

quim

Junior Member
Registered Member
Russia is one of the world's leading natural resource powers. Russia will not be a junior partner in any block.

China cannot fall into the arrogance of Europe, which, following orders from the US, lost all the competitiveness that once had and is now losing ground in the world.

Russia needs some electronics and components. China in turn needs access to energy resources and commodities. They are complementary economies, neither has definitive dominance over the other.

When the dust settles on the Ukraine war and the US sees the threat of China uniting with Russia, it will certainly go back to negotiating with Russia to try isolate China.

So it's good for China to take advantage and establish lasting and profitable ties with Russia. Never fall into Western arrogance so as not to lose such an important ally in the global supply of natural resources and expertise.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
Then don't cry and whine when China starts providing lethal aid to Russia, dumba$$.


Blinken can also forget about visiting China. A warmonger shouldn't be welcomed in a peaceful civilization state.

In the meantime, China and Russia should've intensify military cooperation already. Even if those aren't meant for the war in Ukraine, who gives a damn? As long as China can shove as many middle fingers to the US as possible, that's more than enough.
 
Last edited:

solarz

Brigadier
International relations is not like a business/firm?

Junior partners can always switch firms once new opportunity presents itself, whereas vassals can't pick and choose their masters.

Nice, so my boss is a Feudal Lord, and I am his vassal. You do understand I can quit my job at anytime, but vassals can't right? To the extent I have to follow my boss orders to make rent, I will, but I am free to quit at anytime I want. That's the difference between a junior partner and a vassal. One of imbalance of power vs. complete submission to authority/subordination.

That's funny. In the first sentence you say IR isn't like a business, and in the very next you proceed to say junior partners in firms can leave.

What exactly is the relevance here?

My dispute is with the characterization of Russia as a junior partner in a China-Russia partnership. In any partnership where one partner is characterized as a senior and the other as a junior, it means the senior is in charge while the junior is the subordinate.

That, quite simply, is an incorrect description of the China-Russia partnership. China is not in charge, and Russia is not a subordinate.
 
Top