Escalation or propaganda from US vassal S.K. making allegations with some perfunctory evidence provided by S.K. own spy satellites and western private firms like MAXAR, AIRBUS
Getting the US to go on offence out of desperation is conducive to China's goals, same way Japan going on the offensive in response to oil embargo was conducive to US goals.
Mr. Gigot asks how Mr. Trump would persuade Xi Jinping to stand down from a blockade of Taiwan.
“Oh, very easy,” the former president says. “I had a very strong relationship with him. He was actually a really good, I don’t want to say friend—I don’t want to act foolish, ‘he was my friend’—but I got along with him great. He stayed at Mar-a-Lago with me, so we got to know each other great. He’s a very fierce person.”
That visit coincided with the April 2017 U.S. bombing of Syria, where China reportedly had a military presence. Mr. Trump says he decided to tell Mr. Xi about the bombing over dessert: “I said, ‘President, we’ve just shot 58 missiles into Syria to an airport that’s housing a lot of new planes. Your people are not at risk, but they’re on their way right now.’ He hears it and he goes, ‘Repeat.’ . . . I said, ‘You speak English, don’t you?’ ” Until then, the two men had communicated only with the aid of an interpreter.
“I repeated it, and he understood it. He sat like this, he’s a good poker player. First it looked like he was furious, right? I repeated it again. ‘Oh, OK.’ Then we got back to—he was pretty cool. But he’s a fierce guy.”
Mr. Trump returns to Mr. Gigot’s question: “I would say: If you go into Taiwan, I’m sorry to do this, I’m going to tax you”—meaning impose tariffs—“at 150% to 200%.” He might even shut down trade altogether.
Mr. Gigot: “Would you use military force against a blockade on Taiwan?”
Mr. Trump: “I wouldn’t have to, because he respects me and he knows I’m f— crazy.”
Deal of the f**king century. Tariffs for reunification with Taiwan, critical support for comrade Trump.Vladimir Putin knows it too, in Mr. Trump’s telling: “I said to Putin, ‘Vladimir, we have a great relationship.’ I got along with him great. He’s a different kind of a character, I will tell you, much different than anybody under—I knew him very well. I said, ‘Vladimir, if you go after Ukraine, I am going to hit you so hard, you’re not even going to believe it. I’m going to hit you right in the middle of fricking Moscow.’ I said, ‘We’re friends. I don’t want to do it, but I have no choice.’ He goes, ‘No way.’ I said, ‘Way.’ I said, ‘You’re going to be hit so hard, and I’m going to take those f— domes right off your head.’ Because, you know, he lives under the domes.”
Yet Chinese universities win competitive programming medals and Indian ones don't. Something is not adding up here.non paywalled:
Its in paragraph containing:
This is actually true. Students in China rarely get kicked out.
How do you square these circles?
Do you know anything about the study this Muppet is referring to?
Nature Index 2024 Research Leaders: India follows in China’s footsteps as top ten changes again
Historical science strongholds grapple with challenging conditions, while emerging contenders make their mark.
Nature Index 2024 Research Leaders: Chinese institutions dominate the top spots
Seven out of the leading ten institutions this year are based in China, while Stanford University drops out of the top ranks for the first time.
China passes US as world’s top researcher, showing its R&D might
Rise fueled by heavy spending and growing number of researchers
China now global leader in 90% of critical tech research: think tank
AUKUS encouraged to join forces with Japan and South Korea to close gap
Indeed, my own experience working with Chinese graduate students and research fellows in STEM studies would suggest the opposite of the highlighted claim in the article; if anything, I'd say that if one considers Chinese starting education and thinking baseline on entry to university is higher than their Indian or Russian counterparts, relative changes to baseline would be less noticeable than compared with a lower baseline for example. In addition, one may also need to consider the possibility of weighted factors such as having humanities or social science courses (or not), as well as sampling size of various majors (the study indicated only 2 majors for instance, but the analysis may differ if the number of examined majors were 7 even with retaining the same sample size for each individual major).Yet Chinese universities win competitive programming medals and Indian ones don't. Something is not adding up here.
Critical thinking without fundamental knowledge is simply castles in the air, studies like this only masks the problem, that basic education in the west is lagging behind even more that they can only bragging about critical thinking and creativity without being able to really get anything done.
This is the claim.
I guess all Chinese universities can close now since they're negative value added. There's no difference between a high school grad and a university grad so companies should just hire high school grads at lower cost. Nature Index? Programming competitions? What's that?
Or maybe this only further shows that western economics and psychology is just religion with math.