Miscellaneous News

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
I presume this means that after the death of Nguyen Phu Trong anti-China faction has prevailed ?

MANILA, Aug 30 (Reuters) - The Philippines and Vietnam will sign a defence cooperation agreement on Friday, the office of Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr said, a significant step by two countries that have long opposed China's actions in the South China Sea.

Vietnamese Defence Minister Phan Van Giang was in Manila on Friday to hold talks with his Philippine counterpart, Gilberto Teodoro, and he paid a courtesy call earlier in the day on Marcos.

"We now talk about defence cooperation, security cooperation, maritime cooperation, and certainly, on the area of trade as well," Marcos was quoted as saying in a statement, which did not specify details of the defence agreement.
"Your visit, I think, will serve as further impetus, further push to increase that – the depth and the range of our relationship."
The agreement comes at a time of simmering tension in the South China Sea and international concern about an escalation, and over the conduct of China's vast fleet of coastguard and its activities in the exclusive economic zones of its neighbours.

Vietnam has a tricky balancing act of opposing actions by China that it deems infringements on its sovereignty, while needing to maintain close relations with its giant neighbour, forged over decades by their ruling Communist Parties.
Vietnam's decision to enter into the agreement comes at a time when U.S. defence ally the Philippines and China are sparring almost every week over the South China Sea, a row that has raged for more than a year.
China claims sovereignty over almost all of the strategic waterway.
Despite their overlapping claims in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, where Vietnam and the Philippines each occupies atolls and reefs, both countries have expressed desire to work together and tackle disputes.
Coast guards of the two countries earlier this month held their first-ever joint exercises in Manila, simulating fire-fighting drills and search-and-rescue exercises.
That came after Marcos visited Hanoi in January and signed deals that covered "incident prevention in the South China Sea" and "maritime cooperation".

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Sounds like an agreement as hollow as the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. We all know how well that went. Vietnam built the most island bases in the SCS. It routinely clashes with other SCS claimants including the PH. The PH Coastguard was responsible for killing a number of Vietnamese fishermen in the last decade.

This "pact" appears to be more like a non-aggression agreement than an alliance. Both side want to put their clashes on hold while they focus on China. PH wants this much more than Vietnam. But if the PH provokes a hot conflict with China, I don't expect the Vietnamese, to come to their aid. They have way too much to lose helping the PH, and they are not as stupid as the PH.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Yeah, China is the substantially weaker party in U.S.-China relations. The U.S. gets to set terms
If that is true, the US government must love screwing itself and helping China out grow the US at every metric because that's what's happening and that's what the terms allow to happen.
Getting China to sanction Vietnam is good for the United States since it harms China’s economy with no cost to the U.S., it irreparably harms a bilateral relationship China holds that it built up with substantial effort, and it makes for all asean states to look to the U.S. to play daddy moral hazard/external balancer. Since there’s nothing China can do to substantively harm the U.S., it just harms US “puppets” but in doing so, it makes it much easier for the U.S. to improve relations with said “puppets” and it harms China’s economy
Sanctions on Vietnam are "irreparable" harm? LOLOL What do you call spraying Napalm/Agen Orange all over them? We've fought wars with them; we've taken territory from them. Nothing is irreparable as long as there is power.

Secondly, China focuses on self-growth, while the US tries to harm others while inadverdently harming itself. That's been the pattern all along. Those who can achieve victory on their own strength never bother to resort to sabotage of others. And this will continue with the US boxing itself in, losing critical oppertunities trying to harm China while China expands into other markets and develops technology that makes American tech obsolete.
“Last cries of a dying empire”: so when should we expect said “empire” to end?
Couple decades
The trade war has started since 2018 and the U.S. economy has grown substantially since then, the tensions in the U.S.-China relationship have had negligible impact on macroeconomic statistics,
And in this time, China has grown much more, both economically and technologically. The US started the trade war to reverse this trend but it accelerated it instead.
and are clearly US-China tensions still top of mind for Chinese corporates and policymakers
LOLOL All your elections are about how to handle China! We don't even think about America; turn on Chinese news and nobody talks about you. We just find new trade partners and develop better tech. You think you're on the top of our minds because we're on top of yours but unlike the US, China has way too many oppertunities to be concerned about other people and their hateful loser energy.
with the U.S. entirely steering this ship.
It's been doing a shit job if it wanted the US to stay on top of the world... either that or it has lost control.
Even if you assume the U.S. economy grows at 1.5% and China grows at 5% into perpetuity, there are 2-3 decades where the U.S. economy is at least 70% of China’s size. If this “dying” involves in the best Chinese case, waiting an entire working career for maybe, one day, seeing the relative U.S. power position ambiguously drop, that’s gotta be worth something, I guess (?)
Empires are measured in the centuries, oh one with the small mind. Just because the US is barely able to get to 1 doesn't mean we suddenly start measuring in "working careers." LOL Once the US loses overall power to China, everything crumbles fast because the US has very little internal power but relies on parasiting on others. When it can no longer do so because they align with China, the American vampire shrivels up at record pace.
This is simple. 20%-ish of Chinese workers are subsidence farmers as opposed to ~0% of the U.S. population:
Source required.
then if you look at US firms - there simply are no Chinese equivalents of the size and scope of U.S. firms like Microsoft, Oracle, Linde, Air Products and Chemicals, ThermoFisher Intel, Pfizer, Nvidia, AMD, Boeing, etc and countless other innovative manufacturers and service firms. China simply lacks the multiplicity of large technologically complex firms that the U.S. contains in droves - that drives the technological frontier more than anything else and can easily explain the productivity differential.
1. That's not true; China has many firms, often state-backed but not always (like Huawei) that can challenge and oftentimes exceed any American offering.

2. Even in the past when that was true, China still developed itself faster economically and technologically than the US with all its megacorps. The power only further tilts in China's favor.
Even with the recent Boeing and Intel news - they clear far more in revenue and volume in a quarter than COMAC and a random set of Chinese logic IC manufacturers have cleared in the past decade combined
Revenue is not important. Technological innovation is important; revenue can be made by anyone ready to cash out and go home. New tech controls the future and China always moves faster there.
Indeed. US power is based off of accumulated U.S. advantages in physical capital, human capital, technological development, network effects, etc. unless China somehow manages to vaporize every facility and company document, those advantages will be enduring
LOL No. Accumulated advantages is basically another way of saying resting on one's laurels. Only faster innovation is enduring; old advantages are there to be run over by new tech.
Hmm…sure. What date should we expect this by?
No date as long as the US manages its decline with self-preservation and humility. The UK did so; learn from them. Don't learn from the dead empires in history that fought against a superior enemy to the bitter end.
If there was, we would’ve seen it by now since with the 301 tariffs, the Huawei export ban, the October 7 export ban, the Pelosi trip to Taiwan, the CFIUS rollout, the TikTok ban, the CCP travel/visa restrictions, the South China Sea/Philippines stuff, the journalist kicking out, the Taiwan Travel Act, US army members in Taiwan, etc
among others were all the 246,495th time the US apparently crossed China’s red line only for China to do…nothing.
All useless flailing because the US is out of any effective ways to stymie China's innovative pace. The only impactful actions in all the exchanges here is China expanding its de facto territory in the SCS. No one does these worthless annoying American things if they could do meaningful things like China building islands, turning them into military bases, creating the tech of the future and indiginizing tech that used to be foreign dominated. In comparison, America's sailing around in circles or flying old ladies to disputed territories to do absolutely nothing are truly the desperate actions of a waning empire.

By the way, can your politicians even do a ban right? Look at China. Facebook: Banned. Yahoo: Banned. Google: Banned. US, Tiktok... been talking about a ban for years and I'm still getting hit by videos of American idiot culture on it! Do your retard politicians even know how to ban an app??
 
Last edited:

caudaceus

Senior Member
Registered Member
Anybody wonder why Western media doesn't harp 24/7 about "global warming" anymore?

I wondered for sometime and suspected it is because US wanted to but failed miserably at what China actually did - become the dominant force in the global green tech market, replacing fossil fuels.

But today, I searched the web and came across this report on the findings of a German renewable energy company's research on the topic (scouring through trillions of online data points):

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
  • Searches for 'global warming' down 73% since 2010
  • New term is 'climate crisis' (but the report did not show it in numbers)
From what I read on reddit because the impact is not simply "warming weather" anymore but sometimes also prolonged winter or other climates aberration. So climate crisis is more apt.
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
This is simple. 20%-ish of Chinese workers are subsidence farmers as opposed to ~0% of the U.S. population: then if you look at US firms - there simply are no Chinese equivalents of the size and scope of U.S. firms like Microsoft, Oracle, Linde, Air Products and Chemicals, ThermoFisher Intel, Pfizer, Nvidia, AMD, Boeing, etc and countless other innovative manufacturers and service firms. China simply lacks the multiplicity of large technologically complex firms that the U.S. contains in droves - that drives the technological frontier more than anything else and can easily explain the productivity differential.

Even with the recent Boeing and Intel news - they clear far more in revenue and volume in a quarter than COMAC and a random set of Chinese logic IC manufacturers have cleared in the past decade combined

Indeed. US power is based off of accumulated U.S. advantages in physical capital, human capital, technological development, network effects, etc. unless China somehow manages to vaporize every facility and company document, those advantages will be enduring

Hmm…sure. What date should we expect this by?
You really shouldn't make claims that are easily falsifiable.

Intel is about half of Huawei by revenue.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

54 billion USD revenue

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

99 billion USD revenue

Even Boeing + Intel have revenue comparable to Huawei alone.

But why did you compare Boeing, a conglomerate with both civil and military business, to COMAC, a subsidiary focused on the civil business? Why not compare to the parent company AVIC? That's intellectually dishonest to compare a whole to a part.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

67 billion USD revenue

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

77 billion USD revenue

So Huawei + AVIC > Intel + Boeing. Get factually corrected.

Naming companies doesn't mean much. But it doesn't help if you're wrong and intellectually dishonest.
 
Last edited:

caudaceus

Senior Member
Registered Member
You really shouldn't make claims that are easily falsifiable.

Intel is about half of Huawei by revenue.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

54 billion USD revenue

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

99 billion USD revenue

Even Boeing + Intel have revenue comparable to Huawei alone.

But why did you compare Boeing, a conglomerate with both civil and military business, to COMAC, a subsidiary focused on the civil business? Why not compare to the parent company AVIC? That's intellectually dishonest to compare a whole to a part.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

67 billion USD revenue

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

77 billion USD revenue

So Huawei + AVIC > Intel + Boeing. Get factually corrected.

Naming companies doesn't mean much. But it doesn't help if you're wrong and intellectually dishonest.
Might as well compare China Railway and Amtrak
 
Top