A scorpion never loses its sting or its venom or its nature. So... watch out!
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Never thought of it this way, but you are right... The best thing for Canada would be her leaving inside a contrabass case.
When the myth that Crypto is untraceable really sinks in. Crypto is purely for speculators.
As many believe crypto transactions maintain anonymity, cryptocurrencies are regarded as being safe to carry out illegal transactions. But thinking they are untraceable is , according to crypto ATM operator CoinFlip's CEO Ben Weiss.
As many believe crypto transactions maintain anonymity, cryptocurrencies are regarded as being safe to carry out illegal transactions. But thinking they are untraceable is , according to crypto ATM operator CoinFlip's CEO Ben Weiss.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
It’s not that Americans are cowardly. That would be a gross simplification and massive underestimation of America and Americans.
It’s just that America’s leaders keep sending their troops into hopeless situations to fight wars of choice that no one in America really believes in or know how to actually win.
Afghanistan is a cultural, political and economic problem that America tried to solve with primarily military solutions backed up with only token economic projects and self-serving virtue-signalling vanity cultural programmes that trampled on core traditional Afghan customes and beliefs without first laying the groundwork for such a cultural revolution amongst the local population or the means or will to see it through.
Ironically, if you want to see how such a cultural, economic and political problem can be solved, you need look no further than Xinjiang right across the boarder.
I think a huge amount of the new American-led western smear campaign against Xinjiang is inextricably linked to Afghanistan.
As retired American colonels openly admitted, a core reason for America staying in Afghanistan is that they wanted to use it as a springboard to destabilise Xinjiang next door. Now Xinjiang is peaceful and prosperous like ever before while America has to slip out of Afghanistan in the dead of night likes thief without daring to tell anyone and you can see why they might be a bit mentally imbalanced about the whole thing.
You know China is doing something seriously right when even the Taliban are bending backwards to assure China they bare China no ill will and don’t want any piece of Chinese internal affairs. That’s the same Taliban who must be on historic highs after driving out the Americans.
Looks like both China and the Taliban learnt useful lessons from the end of the Vietnam war. Where China has flexed hard and subtle enough to give the Taliban zero delusions about trying to destabilise Xinjiang; while the Taliban also learnt from Vietnam’s post-victory strategic overreach due to delusions of grandeur and the consequences of forcing China to teach them some humility to not want to experience that first hand themselves.
No wonder the Americans are super pissed and trying to stir up trouble like there is no tomorrow.
Make no mistake, I do not underestimate americans. Americans are cowardly because they cannot admit to themselves why they were there to begin with. Was it to go after Bin Laden (doubtful, since he was killed in Pakistan)? Was it to remake Afghanistan in its image (a monumental failure, as we will soon go back to what was prior to the invasion)? America lied to its own people continuously about why it was there to begin with, and therefore did not have the fortitude to continue to any ultimate objective.
Its the exact same thing as Vietnam. America didnt learn. If the cause were righteous, America and its people would actually tolerate 100,000 casualties, such as the case of WWII or the civil war. But this was not WWII or the civil war, so there was no way for america to sustain a conflict to ultimate victory.
That is a totally reversed statement of reality. Capitalism grows within a state and feeds by its market in its early time. Then it hits the roof because the market eventually becomes too small and natural resource becomes limited. It need bigger market and more resource, so naturally it will expend outside of its native state. Since capital controls its government, it is only natural for the state to force open other countries' market by military means, hence capitalism grows into imperialism.
The colonial expansion of Europe all over the world is the perfect illustration.
Note, imperialism here has NOTHING to do with empire like ancient Rome, Persian and Chinese. Imperialism in modern political-economical study is specifically defined as a later development of capitalism. This is what Marxism means when using this term.
Here is the trick that main stream western school trying to muddy the water. In this school Imperialism literally means anything about an empire. And empire is an English word denoting any state that has vast land and population. In doing so the west conveniently put ancient Rome, China, Persia and even India on the same lot with the modern colonialist. This school took a well and clearly defined term from their opponent and twist its meaning. This is a tactic to whitewash their specific guilt, it is a exact same tactic of re-defining "marriage", also similar to labeling China "neo-colonialism". It is "If I am going to loose, I will move the goal post", "If I was a thief, I will call everyone a thief".
I don't know if you are aware of the above. But I would like to remind you that "which definition one chooses" is a fundamental point that can not be debated. It is like a devoted god-believer vs. a atheist. There is no common ground for the two to discuss.
Is that what they teach in school nowadays? That is all bullshit. Agree with what you are saying.
Imperialism was always a two step process. First subjugate the foreign population. Second rip them off.
That is how Europe got wealthy.
Where did all their gold come from?
Gold was and still is real money.
The gold holdings of western countries today, owe it roots primary from ripping off other peoples in the past.
That is Imperialism. To beat them up and then rip them off.
The United States wanted to do that too in Afghanistan in recent years, but they wimped out.
Don't quite get what you wanted to say. If those are bullshit, how could you agree with what I was saying? P.S. I don't take offense of your wording.
Those were taught in my school years IN China. And I am certain they are still taught today.
By your objecting to that teach, I am sure you were not Chinese, or you migrated out of China in early ages.
Regardless, I must emphasize once again, this "imperialism" is NOT your "imperialism". This imperialism is a specific term created by Karl Marx from an existing word imperial + ism to describe a new concept in his work. Before him, there was no such terminology in social science study. It is like "class" which is NOT the same thing as class in daily English language.
You are free to use the word imperialism as an English word but you must be aware that what you are talking about is different thing from others. It is same as the word marriage in Canada is NOT a marriage in China and most of the world, and it was NOT even the same marriage in Canada before 2005. You can't argue about what marriage entails with a Chinese, or with an old generation Canadian.
Therefor, debating whether a concept and its content is right or wrong is totally pointless if people use their personal favored definition instead of the original one.
Last edited: