This will be troublesome. Hopefully she gets too busy in Australia to interfere elsewhere. Has anyone read her works?
China need a new geopolitical Doctrine ?
- Thread starter MrCrazyBoyRavi
- Start date
- Status
People of the tidalwave persuasion have nothing better to do than spam FUD here. Since China's curb-stomping every problem in front of it, they (if a madman's multiple personalities can be referred to in the plural) have to reach further and further down into their barrel of FUD until they're scraping the absolute bottom - hence we're supposed to be shaking with fear at *gasp* Kirstjen Nielsen.
escobar
Brigadier
Is it my imagination that US Navy C-40a flies inland over Taiwan's west coast ?
Learn to know the difference between a transactional IR primary based on favor and IR based on leadership, deterrence in which you do a favor. Your view of IR is so low and lack sophistication.
You are so funny. I'm the one saying that CHina should not overacting on Australia decision on Huawei.
Why should I care about what Australia is saying? You are the one caring so much to have Australia not doing some things you don't like because of the trade surplus Australia enjoyed. What matter here is China action.
It is because you don't understand this reality that you care so much about Australia not banning huawei.
Yes, I understand that you view of IR is primary transactional. You lack sophistication a great power need to have.
Sure, you are logical. Just a low level IR logic
Yeah, for all the trade benefits Australia get for China, Huawei is still banned.
China taking measures against Australia? But you just said Australia act like a victim and is interpreting everything China said as a threat. What a great logic...
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
You were just talking about the US putting marines on the ROC. Moving the goal post much there?
Leadership must provide benefits as well. Transactional is one-time while "leadership" means that both sides continue to do favors for each other without counting. All the same, if one side suddenly stops, the other side won't take long to do follow. A country, even in a position of leadership, cannot simply act in its own favor without regard or benefit to its allies or it will lose them, just more slowly than in a transactional relationship. It is your lack of sophistication that you did not take it further to see this step.
Fools find everything funny.
Then stop telling me to check what Australia is saying, cus I don't care either.
I think you have me confused with some other member. I don't care what Australia does but I think China should send its business elsewhere where it can because I don't think that Australia is a country that deserves Chinese business in areas where China has alternatives.
Confused with another member; I don't care about Australia or their backwards internet.
See above:
" Leadership must provide benefits as well. Transactional is one-time while "leadership" means that both sides continue to do favors for each other without counting. All the same, if one side suddenly stops, the other side won't take long to do follow. A country, even in a position of leadership, cannot simply act in its own favor without regard or benefit to its allies or it will lose them, just more slowly than in a transactional relationship. It is your lack of sophistication that you did not take it further to see this step. "
My logic is an earthly logic that works and resounds throughout the world; yours is sky high in imagination.
OK, no problem, so we remove as much as we can and give those benefits to nations that deserve them. Chinese consumers don't want to patronize Australia where we don't need to. Any issue with that?
It is great logic. Someone giving you benefits wishes now to ween you off of them and give them to someone else. The institute funding your research no longer wishes to give you money. A partner in business wishes to withdraw himself because he no longer sees the merits of the joint venture. Better yet, your client has cancelled his order with you (or no longer wishes to continue placing his regular orders) because he wishes to take his business elsewhere. Are those threats? No, a threat is someone saying he will assault or sabotage you. Cancelling business deals are not a threat or all the banks and businesses would be threatening each other all day every day by your "logic."
It seems you have a serious problem with the English language. First you don't know what "coherent" means and now, you don't know what a threat is and both were central to your arguments...
Last edited:
escobar
Brigadier
And you think it is totally impossible.
How this even contradict what i'am saying? You're just repeating what I've been saying for all this time
Good
So much misunderstanding. I stop here
I quote my post
I would add that Xi Jinping in terms of foreign policy is much more aggressive than his predecessors.
If we could afford this luxury before, when the United States was occupied in the Middle East or against Russia, today with the new cold war approaching (no matter the US president, the consensus is bipartisan ) China will need allies, we can't win on several fronts at the same time
China never has any alliance except with NK. China was much more isolated til Deng reform era. Just look at ASEAN nations, the relationship between China and ASEAN is still far better than a decade or two decades ago. I just don't get it why you guys are so desperate wanting people to like China. It is like you are willing to give up territories integrity just to appease these nations but couldn't explain what China would gain from giving up territories.
Myanmar, Cambodia, Lao, and Thailand, and Singapore improve and strengthen over the years
Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brunei, stay about the same over the years
Vietnam and Philippines, much better than the 80s and 90s but worse than 00s
Myanmar, Cambodia, Lao, and Thailand, and Singapore improve and strengthen over the years
Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brunei, stay about the same over the years
Vietnam and Philippines, much better than the 80s and 90s but worse than 00s
I hope you realize that we are entering in a new cold war
When China was poor nobody cared, now that China is making progress in all areas, economy, space, military, semiconductor ect the United States became more aggressive because they don't want to be overtaken
Wake up, we are not in the 80s where China had only 1/20 of the GDP of America
The situation is not the same as in the 80s
Or even in the 2000s when the USA was concerned only with Russia or the Middle East, the Americans will pivot to Asia, Europe will take second place (whether biden or trump), the new cold war is going to take place in asia, and for that, whether you want it or not, china needs allies, and for the moment it is a disaster.
Fortunately for China, the USA has someone like Trump, Biden will be much more serious, I even think that Biden will succeed in mounting Europe against China.
The USA will never accept being overtaken by China, China must be ready, and time is playing on our side, territorial disputes can wait and we must keep the statue quo with our neighbors and improve our relations to be ready for the new cold war, every year we get stronger, our growth is stronger, time is playing in our favor, let's not be in a hurry on territorial issues, Hu Jintao was smarter than Xi Jinping
at the level of international relations.
- Status