Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Korean war, troops under the cover of "volunteers".
Vietnam war, troops wearing Vietnamese uniforms.
Afghan war, munitions. No official engagement.
Syrian war, troops in the open. But neither side is officially fighting one another.
So everything is possible, but it is highly unlikely that the west will make their involvement look official. The basic rule of superpower engagement is not to officially at war. So whoever makes the first official involvement is the sole official player on the ground.
Do they still have enough money leftover after buying Australian wine?
Perfect example of starting with a conclusion and backwards rationalizing an justification using mental gymnastics. In what fucking world is saving millions of lives from infection and death a "bad thing"? Worse of all, they pander to "GDP/Economy", which just proves they have no moral principles. They attach themselves to whatever logic that bashes China.
China can do no good, only bad. So how do we spin China saving millions of it's own citizen lives into a bad thing? (IGNORING that half-assed American lockdowns are copies of China lockdowns, but FAR less effective, MORE DIED, and American economy is WAY WORSE than China which is growing fast than US).
FUCK the US and their Hanjian supporters.
You may debate whether it is a good idea to use the land for solar farm or growing crops, but you are wrong to say "somebody should be allowed to do something there".
The land does NOT belong to anybody, neither the farmer, nor the energy company. It is state property, the farmer as well as the energy company are merely tenet of the state. If the state decides to use the land for different purpose, it can do so with non-negotiable amount of compensation.
The bottom line you must be aware is, land in China is NOT private property. Farming land is like factory, farmers are like workers in the factory, factory owner can fire the workers at any time, the compensation is set by the contract and law, in the case of land, by the state.
That bottom line makes China a Socialist State that the state owns very piece of land. Even if the factory built on it belongs to the capitalist, the capitalist is in no position to wrestle with the state. This also defeats the notion of "China is capitalist in essence".
Last edited:
Who wants these inferior Australian wines anyway? Drink Chilean and French.
I myself drink hard liquors. They give the greatest buzz.
Either get the property that China has paid for, or get the money back. Either way it is better than being robbed by the current Ukrainian regime on behalf of its US master.
For me the biggest thing he said was how the electric vehicle supply chain has spawned 20,000 Chinese companies (?) all over the supply chain.
EVs will feed tire manufacturers, semiconductor companies, self-driving companies, IoT companies, steel companies, lithium etc etc
News from last week:
1. BYD to build electric vehicles under the Toyota brand. But it's really a Chinese car.
2. Mitsubishi Airtrek with 500km range. But really it's a 50-50 Joint Venture with GAC of Guangzhou. AND produced in China.
Last edited:
Did all these people learn their English from the same teacher? It seems that their vocabulary is limited to "at what cost".