Miscellaneous News

Coalescence

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
supercat said:
Actually, both political unrest and no-confidence vote were tried to derail Solomon Islands' relationship with China. We arrived at this stage because both failed.

I guess she would be ecstatic if the Han Chinese became extinct, because that would certainly hurt the CPC! Some of the pro-West Chinese are really the worst China-haters.
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1507437253156433929
Click to expand...
I like the replies to her in that thread, turning the argument against her. So does women and males refusing to marry in US, because they are silently resisting against Western Hegemony?

Seriously, these "China-watchers" are schizophrenic, and somehow always manages to turn issues big or small unrelated to the government, into something like a "resistance" of the people or "tyranny" of the government. its absolutely nauseating.
 
S

SilentObserver

Junior Member
Registered Member
Bellum_Romanum said:
This so-called advisor has gained some fame, and notoriety due to this 2019 interview in which he pretty much laid out the rational, and the known intent that Ukraine sought this war against Russia for their own strategic reasoning. Apparently this dude had been preparing, advising the Ukrainian government on this very scenario. It looks like he's almost mapped everything out.

Click to expand...
Thanks for posting this. Alexey Arestovich/Oleksiy Arestovych is currently the Adviser to the Head of the President Office of Ukraine. He also predicted Russian take over of Crimea years before it occurred.

It's interesting to watch an interview from 2019 laying out the current events.

@2:55 "Only accession to NATO. If we do not join NATO, then we are finished. We do not have the strength to be neutral. We will not remain neutral."

@3:38 "And we have 2,700km of land border with Russia, which are bare steppes. Do you have any idea how much neutrality will cost us? And count the rest of the countries that have territorial claims against us. Therefore, we will not maintain neutrality, we will not have enough resources. Geographically, no country would be able to maintain neutrality in this position. If we cannot maintain neutrality, we will drift either to the "Taiga Union" (the Eurasian Union with Russia) or to the NATO, there are no other options."

@6:20 Interviewer: "What should the president do? What are the first ten steps?" Alexey: "He must win the parliamentary elections, this is his main step. Because if the parliament in disagreement with the president, then reform packages will be blocked, primarily the direction of joining the EU and NATO. It will be necessary to dissolve parliament and hold new elections. And when this is done, then he will need to get a MAP(membership action plan) in NATO..."

@7:20 "No, we can not talk about any lines of ending the war here, on the contrary, this will most likely push Russia to a major military operation against Ukraine. Because they will have to squander us in terms of infrastructure, and turn everything here into a ruined territory, so that NATO would be reluctant to accept us."

@7:43 Alexey: "With a probability of 99.9%, our price for joining NATO is a full-scale war with Russia. And if we do not join NATO, then the absorption by Russia within 10-12 years. That's the whole fork in which we are." Interviewer: "Wait, and now if you put the bowl on the scales, what is better in this case?" Alexey: "Of course, a major war with Russia and the transition to NATO as a result of the victory over Russia."

@8:10 Interviewer: "And what is a 'major' war with Russia?" Alexey: "Well, it could be an air invasion operation, an offensive by the Russian armies that they created on our border, a siege of Kyiv, an attempt to encircle troops in the ATO zone. A breakthrough through the Crimean Isthmus, an offensive from the territory of Belarus, the creation of new 'people's republics', sabotage, attacks on critical infrastructure, and so on. That's what a major war is, and the probability of it is 99%"

@8:45 Interviewer: "When?" Alexey: "After 2020, 21 and 22 are the most critical, then 2024-2026 and the following 2028-2030 will be critical. Maybe even three wars with Russia."

It is quite clear that the plan is NATO or nothing, he understands the consequences of this gamble. They think the potential reward is worth the certain immense cost. There won't be any meaningful agreement to a ceasefire, any agreement is buying time to rest in between the fight and both sides knows this.
 
W

Will76

New Member
Registered Member
Bellum_Romanum said:
This so-called advisor has gained some fame, and notoriety due to this 2019 interview in which he pretty much laid out the rational, and the known intent that Ukraine sought this war against Russia for their own strategic reasoning. Apparently this dude had been preparing, advising the Ukrainian government on this very scenario. It looks like he's almost mapped everything out.

Click to expand...
I mean Putin was always going to do this to protect Russia interest. Crimea was a warning.
 
Coalescence

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
SilentObserver said:
It is quite clear that the plan is NATO or nothing, he understands the consequences of this gamble. They think the potential reward is worth the certain immense cost. There's won't be any meaningful agreement to a ceasefire, any agreement is buying time to rest in between the fight and both sides knows this.
Click to expand...
And its absolutely cynical gamble. There are more prosperous path they could have taken like being a neutral country, stop genocide against Russian speaking population, offering some autonomy to the rebel province and benefiting from being a bridge between Russia/China and EU. Sure, those moves may anger your nationalistic voter base, but this puts your country in a position for the future that offers you more leverage against Russia and more room to maneuver geopolitically. If they played their hands right, they might be able to diplomatically get Crimea back, and convince the rebel provinces to reintegrate back to Ukraine.

It seems they are borderline paranoid about Russia, taking over Ukraine in the future? I say its a self-fulfilling prophecy, if they promoted economic and political connections between Russia and EU, then the cost and benefit analysis for Russia to even contemplate ruining their relations with EU over getting territories in Ukraine would be completely unthinkable.

This is a massive tragedy and huge miscalculation/orientation on Ukraine's part. Don't even think of any future plans for Ukraine 2028-2030, hell don't even think of a plan for next year. Ukraine as a nation is done, there's no future. Win or lose, Ukraine has become non-investable and their population will further migrate to better pastures in EU. And once again, the fringe minority deciding for the majority, sharing the consequence of their decisions to those that have no say in it.
 
Bellum_Romanum

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
These neocons a.k.a. the Kagans of which Victoria Nuland is a clan member are truly insidious monsters. Here's her latest charm offensive designed to attract the people of India.

The Chinese Vice Foreign minister drew a parallel between
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
’s eastward expansion in Europe and the Quad in the Indo-Pacific.
Obviously, China is trying to seek an advantage for itself in this conflict, as it always does. But again, what threatens China most: open and free societies who offer their people a different way of life than the Communist party of China offers for Chinese people.
So NATO is a defensive alliance, of voluntary alignment of countries who asked to join together to defend themselves. In the Indo-Pacific strategy, we are talking about the great democracies of the region, working together to protect themselves and to advance prosperity, and free and open commerce and navigation and all of these things. All of the things that the autocrats want to change, want to threaten. So I’m not surprised that the Chinese are trying to draw parallels here. Because, in both cases, we’re talking about trying to keep the world free for democratic governance.
Who is a bigger threat — Russia or China?
The worry now is that they intensify their efforts together. They learn from each other, whether it is how to coerce a neighbour economically, or militarily. Whether it’s about how to go in the UN system and undercut the rules of the road that the US, India and other democracies have built to favour freedom. Whether it is that they let each other off the hook by financing each other’s militaries.
All of these things are worrying. But I also think that this is an energizing moment for the democracies, because now we see very clearly what we are up against.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
9dashline

9dashline

Captain
Registered Member
FriedButter said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



Here is 1 theory.
Click to expand...
Nope, powerloss does not do this, at most the airplane becomes a glider and at that attitude can glide for hundreds of miles...
Only thing that can do this would be if one of the engines reversers accidentally engaged midair (malfunction) but even that wouldn't explain why it almost made a recovery at 8000 feet... before going down for the final and fatal plunge.
 
Coalescence

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
Bellum_Romanum said:
These neocons a.k.a. the Kagans of which Victoria Nuland is a clan member are truly insidious monsters. Here's her latest charm offensive designed to attract the people of India.

The Chinese Vice Foreign minister drew a parallel between
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
’s eastward expansion in Europe and the Quad in the Indo-Pacific.
Obviously, China is trying to seek an advantage for itself in this conflict, as it always does. But again, what threatens China most: open and free societies who offer their people a different way of life than the Communist party of China offers for Chinese people.
So NATO is a defensive alliance, of voluntary alignment of countries who asked to join together to defend themselves. In the Indo-Pacific strategy, we are talking about the great democracies of the region, working together to protect themselves and to advance prosperity, and free and open commerce and navigation and all of these things. All of the things that the autocrats want to change, want to threaten. So I’m not surprised that the Chinese are trying to draw parallels here. Because, in both cases, we’re talking about trying to keep the world free for democratic governance.
Who is a bigger threat — Russia or China?
The worry now is that they intensify their efforts together. They learn from each other, whether it is how to coerce a neighbour economically, or militarily. Whether it’s about how to go in the UN system and undercut the rules of the road that the US, India and other democracies have built to favour freedom. Whether it is that they let each other off the hook by financing each other’s militaries.
All of these things are worrying. But I also think that this is an energizing moment for the democracies, because now we see very clearly what we are up against.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
This is just preaching to the choir, India has already voiced and maintain their position of having strategic and normal trade relations with Russia. No amount of talks about "values" and "democracy" will convince them to become a pawn in their idiotic game, unless they give them major concessions or shift the cost/benefit analysis to be in favor of working with them.

Honestly, looking at what benefit has India obtained from the start of QUAD, I don't think they know how to properly do diplomacy and international affairs anymore. All I see them constantly pressuring and browbeating India to do what they want, and giving them token and insignificant benefits.

If they don't change course, eventually China will be able to find a way to bring India to their side, like offering India more say and representation in the region of Asia. Thinking further ahead, I say this is the reason why China was able gain so much influence from the past two decade, using BRI and diplomacy.

The West has relied too heavily on the stick because the carrot has shrunk so much, and worse the stick has been getting smaller every passing time. while China has relied heavily on the carrot in the past, and is only now planning to carry a bigger stick, while still maintaining the size of the carrot.
 
V

victoon

Junior Member
Registered Member
Bellum_Romanum said:
But again, what threatens China most: open and free societies who offer their people a different way of life than the Communist party of China offers for Chinese people.
Click to expand...
Now we know why China is so scared of India, a different way of life (according to the Americans). I wonder how convincing it is to Indians. Maybe they want a bit of Chinese way of life for themselves.

Bellum_Romanum said:
They learn from each other, whether it is how to coerce a neighbor economically, or militarily.
Click to expand...
I am sorry to say China is a shrewd student of the US much more than Russia because China is in line to replace US' role in the world, not USSR/Russia's.
 
Last edited:
Coalescence

Coalescence

Senior Member
Registered Member
victoon said:
Now we know why China is so scared of India, a different way of life (according to the Americans).
Click to expand...
Its the same lame attempt of propaganda they did with Russia, saying that Putin feels threaten of Ukraine, because of their way of life and "democracy".

Sure man, Putin is threatened at a country who's population is dwindling and going old, GDP still down from their peak back in 90's and have the worst political corruption in Europe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top