Miscellaneous News

supercat said:

"Fantastic news" if Turkey really starts to fight the US-supported Kurdish SDF.

I didn't know that Joshua Wong has bigger balls than Jimmy Lai.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1866017295312769137

Click to expand...

AssassinsMace said:

Frankly it’s quite sad that so many pro-West Chinese are so dumb. They literally think they can do anything even murdering innocent people if they think they’re on the side of good or white people. They have no conscience. They’re literally sociopaths. They actually live up to the darkest racist stereotypes from the West of Chinese but because they’re pro-West, it’s okay. I bet that all the Hong Kong activists who read this see no problem with what was said in this testimony.

Click to expand...

GulfLander said:

"Too early to remove Syrian rebels from terror list - Starmer"

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Randomuser said:

Now maybe its because you don't see many Chinese on the non-China internet but I feel China doesn't really hype BRCIS despite bring the most important part of it.

Meanwhile the biggest cheerleaders of it are countries like India and other really poor guys. Thats right boys we are gonna be in BRICS and bring down you westoids! You wait and see!

Thats how I realize China is probably the only country that is self assured about its plans for the future. It believes in itself and that it will be able to beat the west through careful planning and tenacity. Meanwhile you have all these other global south countries just clinging onto China hoping it will act like Superman and do all the heavy lifting for them. That's just putting more pressure and burden on China when China itself doesn't go far to hyping such stuff. It is detrimental to the cause. And many of these global south countries despite all their yapping will not put their money where it is at and still buy overpriced crap from those "westoids" instead of China. When their elites need to flee, they go to London first instead of Shanghai or Beijing. At least those idiots in China are finally beginning to wake up and buy domestically but since they don't open their mouths so much, they don't place so much self burden on themselves.

The key to American alliances is make sure only other rich guys who don't cause trouble can join in. For everyone else they just do what Uncle Sam says or Uncle Sam will get out the stick and whack them until they say yes since he doesn't take no for a answer.

Click to expand...

Biscuits said:

It's because people forget that China has about the same population and industrial output as NATO, and around 65% of their gdp, which if they bothered with some creative accounting tricks could easily be 100%.

US is more scared of being isolated than China, because US doesn't directly compare to China. NATO does. And while NATO would still prefer to have some non NATO partners, it isn't reliant on it. The same applies to China.

People have this very very wrong perception that global south countries such as the likes of Iran serve a role similar to France or UK in China's alliance structure, when in reality, the role of France or UK in China's alliance structure is served by say Chongqing or Guangdong. Iran, the various sahel anti French dudes, are more like Pinochet or Milei. Nice to have, but the empire does not survive off their contributions, and new ones similar to them are quite easy to create.

Russia is the only actual essential ally to China, because it ensures resource autarky in the worst case scenario. That's why theyre heavily backing Russia.

Click to expand...

GulfLander said:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1866292256837124538

Click to expand...

GulfLander said:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1866333615426310583

Click to expand...

Sardaukar20 said:

Experience does matter, but what you have learned from that experience matters even more. The Syrian Army had 13 years of war fighting experience. What have they learned? Helicopters picked up US collaborators from the rooftops of Saigon in 1975. Then they did it again in Kabul in 2021. What have the Americans learned? India had more recent combat experience than China, but their Jawans were routed at Galwan 2020. What have the Indians learned?

China doesn't have recent war fighting experience. But it is constantly learning by observing other people's experiences. They've watch what had happened in 1991 in Iraq, and in 1996 in their own waters. Since then, they've been striving to build a brand new military.

What have the Americans learned since 1991 and 2001? They have learned that wars with smaller nations are more fun and that these kinds of wars are good business. They've learned to optimize their military towards smaller and smaller conflicts. They've learned to make more money for less. Gone are the days where America could produce tank divisions. Now they want to produce premium systems at low production rates and sky high prices. Much of America's true formidable strength lies in legacy systems that were brand new in 1991. When these systems are attritted, they cannot be replaced in a reasonable amount of time, and some are even irreplaceable. The new systems can't come online fast enough.

America have learned from it's war experiences to build a military of luxury. While China have learned from no recent war experience to build an actual military that can stand against a Superpower.

Click to expand...

Sardaukar20 said:

Experience does matter, but what you have learned from that experience matters even more. The Syrian Army had 13 years of war fighting experience. What have they learned? Helicopters picked up US collaborators from the rooftops of Saigon in 1975. Then they did it again in Kabul in 2021. What have the Americans learned? India had more recent combat experience than China, but their Jawans were routed at Galwan 2020. What have the Indians learned?

China doesn't have recent war fighting experience. But it is constantly learning by observing other people's experiences. They've watch what had happened in 1991 in Iraq, and in 1996 in their own waters. Since then, they've been striving to build a brand new military.

What have the Americans learned since 1991 and 2001? They have learned that wars with smaller nations are more fun and that these kinds of wars are good business. They've learned to optimize their military towards smaller and smaller conflicts. They've learned to make more money for less. Gone are the days where America could produce tank divisions. Now they want to produce premium systems at low production rates and sky high prices. Much of America's true formidable strength lies in legacy systems that were brand new in 1991. When these systems are attritted, they cannot be replaced in a reasonable amount of time, and some are even irreplaceable. The new systems can't come online fast enough.

America have learned from it's war experiences to build a military of luxury. While China have learned from no recent war experience to build an actual military that can stand against a Superpower.

Click to expand...

jiajia99 said:

In other words, too soon to assume that Syria will come under western rule. More like sooner or later the whole situation there will evolve into a free for all cluster fuck that will tear the whole region apart and in the end, despite what the Turks, Israelis and American douchebags might say, this will be yet another example of a self inflicted ownage that ends up screwing them so badly that the only ones that benefit is China once again and maybe Russia and Iran once they got over the crying phase. I mean seriously, I am seriously convinced that this is yet another carefully laid trap to sap the USA of the necessary resources they need to fight China, why do they keep on falling for the same trap. Still the one running the USA has got collective dementia of it is to be expected that this will happen anyway

Click to expand...