Miscellaneous News

Xsizor said:

Is it German economic system to cut interest rates when you have climbing inflation ?
Germany is an export powerhouse. Not Turkey. What do they do with such depreciating currency ? It has fallen too low to give meaningful export success and growth. Turkey is going to find a good place in Economics books.

Click to expand...

Germanic economic system is different than Germanic economic model. that Germanic economic system that is imposed on Europe creating depopulation of skilled people in Eastern EU and Turkey. The difference between Turkey and rest of Eastern EU is that Turkey managed to increase its population through selling real estate to foreigners. and refugees.
now currency crises has completely destroyed that real estate wealth creation and Erdo has lost face in the region. and half backed industrialization created shortage of consumer items. even a stripped down smallest basic cars now cost $30k.

Xsizor said:

And its quite far fetched to believe a Tatar republic to rise from Ukraine, let alone they'll become rich. A new state created from the present Ukraine ( however that may happen) won't prosper due to the sanctions EU and US will place. Arabs won't invest if western sanctions kick in. Russia itself is threatened with considerable sanctions if Ukraine falls. Erdogan must be on drugs.

Click to expand...

The only thing attracting Erdogan to Ukraine is preventing a newer state made of muslim oligarchs. It will also attract people from Turkey and wider Middleast as climate change impact become more obvious. let see how Turkey managed new sanctions on Russia if imposed.

Phead128 said:

That's because China bogged down 2 million Japanese troops in the China theatre.

If China did not bog down 2 million Japanese troops between 1931-1937, I can assure you Battle of Khalkhin would be reinforced with even larger amount of troops and equipment and that battle could have turned out differently. Soviet Union would have to station millions of troops in Siberia just to deter Japan, which would have made it's Eastern Front (with Nazi Germany) significantly more vulnerable.

Soviets wiped IJA in 1937 because the vast majority of IJA was in China in a stalemate. If China was easily conquered, IJA concentrated it's full might on Siberia, we could be talking about Re-run of Russo-Japanese War, with Nazi Germany invading from West, and Japan from the East.

Click to expand...

IJA concentrating on Siberia would just mean they all starve to death because there's nothing in Siberia beyond Vladivostok.

Russia also had a 1:1 kill ratio in the Russo Japanese War, and you can't compare backwards Russian Empire with Soviet Union having 3rd highest GDP in the world.

Yes China made great contributions to WW2 but it was by defeating the Japanese Army and forcing Japan to invest in ground forces. We could not defeat Japan totally due to the lack of a navy. That is the fault of the weak ROC government which couldn't even match the Qing Dynasty.

Kaeshmiri said:

Yes. Only high level defectors (diplomats, intelligence officials etc) get SK Govt assistance and placement. The ordinary ones are relegated to mundane jobs like cleaning, garbage disposal, washing dishes etc. with nobody giving a shit about their existence.
Then they realize that this isn't worth leaving your family back home & hence they return.

Click to expand...

There are some other issues that defectors face. Basically most are treated as spies right off the bat, and interrogated by NIS and KCIA under questionable circumstances. After they are released they are still usually under constant surveillance and check ins.

Some details

FairAndUnbiased said:

IJA concentrating on Siberia would just mean they all starve to death because there's nothing in Siberia beyond Vladivostok.

Click to expand...

You forgot that BEFORE/PRIOR to the Battle of Khalkhin, Soviet Union was forced to stationed 900,000 troops in Far East/Siberian border along Manchuria to deter Japanese. Only when Soviet spies learned that Japan had decided to seize SE Asia rather than Siberia (and only after the disastrously performance of IJA in Khalkhin) did Soviet Union feel comfortable withdrawing all 900,000 Soviet troops to go to Westwards to the Russo-German border to prepare for Nazi Invasion of Germany.

These extra 900,000 Soviet troops was a huge contribution to the Western front against Nazi Germany. Had China not bog down 2 million Japanese troops in China theatre, then IJA would have bottled-up 900,000 Soviet troops in the Eastern Siberia, which would have allowed Nazi Germany to be more effective against Soviet Union in the Western front.

FairAndUnbiased said:

Russia also had a 1:1 kill ratio in the Russo Japanese War, and you can't compare backwards Russian Empire with Soviet Union having 3rd highest GDP in the world.

Click to expand...

A two-front war with Germany/Japan is a real possibility for Soviet Union had China not fought bravely/courageously to bog down 2 million Japanese troops. I don't get your point. Why wouldn't Japan/Germany coordinate plans against a common enemy if China was a non-factor? what exactly is your point?

FairAndUnbiased said:

Yes China made great contributions to WW2 but it was by defeating the Japanese Army and forcing Japan to invest in ground forces. We could not defeat Japan totally due to the lack of a navy. That is the fault of the weak ROC government which couldn't even match the Qing Dynasty.

Click to expand...

I honestly don't get your point. My original post is responding to how "Americans claim it saved China from Japan", so that was the context of my original post.

Bellum_Romanum said:

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Click to expand...

Good. This Yoon Seok is fervently pro-US and enthusiastic anti-China and would side 100% on everything US and Japan.

Phead128 said:

You forgot that BEFORE/PRIOR to the Battle of Khalkhin, Soviet Union was forced to stationed 900,000 troops in Far East/Siberian border along Manchuria to deter Japanese. Only when Soviet spies learned that Japan had decided to seize SE Asia rather than Siberia (and only after the disastrously performance of IJA in Khalkhin) did Soviet Union feel comfortable withdrawing all 900,000 Soviet troops to go to Westwards to the Russo-German border to prepare for Nazi Invasion of Germany.

These extra 900,000 Soviet troops was a huge contribution to the Western front against Nazi Germany. Had China not bog down 2 million Japanese troops in China theatre, then IJA would have bottled-up 900,000 Soviet troops in the Eastern Siberia, which would have allowed Nazi Germany to be more effective against Soviet Union in the Western front.


A two-front war with Germany/Japan is a real possibility for Soviet Union had China not fought bravely/courageously to bog down 2 million Japanese troops. I don't get your point. Why wouldn't Japan/Germany coordinate plans against a common enemy if China was a non-factor? what exactly is your point?


I honestly don't get your point. My original post is responding to how "Americans claim it saved China from Japan", so that was the context of my original post.

Click to expand...

Americans didn't save China from Japan but they did punish Japan. That is a shame for us. Mere defeat doesn't cause the other side to repent, only punishment does. See how Japan is so arrogant towards China while kowtowing to US and Russia.

In the next war China must not only win but utterly crush the morale of the enemy to the degree where they will hate themselves for even thinking to oppose China in the first place.

Why does the West think China wants global hegemony?​

By
JANUARY 3, 2022

Bellum_Romanum said:

Where's the link to this article?

Click to expand...

Okay just to clarify with some scholarly research on the US's real intentions during ww2

The US government repeatedly threatened to cut off aid to China during World War 2 unless they handed over total command of all Chinese military forces to the US. Chiang simply stalled until the Americans insulted him so badly that he threatened to cut off ties with the Us completely Taylor, Jay. 2009. The Generalissimo: Chiang Kai-shek and the Struggle for Modern China. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, pp. 277-292

US influence over the political, economic, and military affairs of China were greater than any foreign power in the last century, with American personnel appointed in every field, such as the Chief of Staff of the Chinese military, management of the Chinese War Production Board and Board of Transport, trainers of the secret police, and Chiang's personal advisor. Sir George Sansom, British envoy to the US, reported that many US military officers saw US monopoly on Far Eastern trade as a rightful reward for fighting the Pacific war
Lanxin Xiang (1995). Recasting the Imperial Far East: Britain and America in China, 1945-1950. M.E. Sharpe. pp. 23–24.

In 1946 US and KMT signed a treaty granting massive economic concessions to the US. US troops committing rape and running Chinese pedestrians over in their jeeps were not punished
Joseph K.S. Yick (2015). Making Urban Revolution in China: The CCP-GMD Struggle for Beiping-Tianjin, 1945-49: The CCP-GMD Struggle for Beiping-Tianjin, 1945-49. Routledge. pp. 145

Should also read The Tragedy of American diplomacy by William Appleman William's to see the US policy of staging "invasion of American capital and American enterprise" (the exact words of Secretary of State William Bryan) and the role this played in the US intervention in WW2 and provoking the start of the Cold War.

Jingle Bells said:

I am not sure if people like these are actually saying those things seriously, or are they just catering to the idiotic domestic audiences. Because in China's perspective, it would be a BLESSING if the US just go ahead and sanctions Japan and Australia and others for joining RCEP.
Please America, listen to your genius like Mr. Andres Corr. It would be a hell of a fun show down to behold! hahahahaha

Through RCEP, China basically open up their doors and willing gave out a part of their market share to countries like Japan and Korea, so that they can benefit and earn money from the Chinese market. And China, in exchange, gets more global influence. This is how the world operates. The US can only out-compete China, if they are willing to cede more market share to countries like Japan or Australia: to offer them a better deal than China, in order to gain their support. Sadly, this is something the US is not willing to give.

So what people like Corr is saying, is that the Americans is unwilling to compete with China in gaining support and trade relations with other countries, and they will only try to punish other countries for trying to seek national interests for their own nations. This NEVER works. This is how they USSR got so much hate from the rest of the Eastern block.

Click to expand...

This highlights what is probably the most fundamental difference in the approach to international relations between the United States and China. China believes in a win-win approach, while the US treats them as a zero-sum game, where someone has to win and someone has to lose. This means that the US considers itself as the sole possible winner of its foreign policy acts, but at the same time it expects its allies/vassals to tow the line, even if it offers them no material gains and goes against their own interests. This approach is creating an increasing rift inside these countries, and we're already seeing signs of it: in Germany the new chancellor Scholz and his own foreign minister have conflicting postures regarding China and Russia. The EU in general is torn between becoming a junior partner to the US in their geopolitical conflict, and following a more independent foreign policy, which would benefit more from reapproaching China and Russia rather than alienating them. In South Korea, the two top presidential candidates are divided between following a more neutral, independent foreign policy, and openly siding with the US against China.