Miscellaneous News

supercat

Major
China's response to the EU sanction is actually disproportionately harsh this time, as the following article explains. China invited EU members to visit Xinjiang, but they refused unless they could meet Ilham Tohti, who was serving terms in Chinese prison. This demand was unacceptable for China. Some people might worry that such push-back against EU might jeopardize the EU-China Agreement on Investment. However, for China, on this 120th anniversary of Boxer Protocol, sovereignty and security are priceless.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
It's interesting how when the same arguments the US and China traded in Alaska was also repeated at the UN but there the US ambassador to the UN was an African-American woman who countered China by bringing up how bad black people are treated in the US. You better believe there was anger in Washington that she did that but because she was black they had to bite their tongue. No one is going to tell her to lie to the world how the US can do no wrong. No other American would admit to such a thing. They would go on acting like the US had a perfect record of doing no wrong like Blinken did in Alaska and he felt side-swiped that China brought the US's bad record. You're not going to be hearing about phone calls from Biden scolding his UN ambassador nor a word from Republicans. China should remember that if the US ambassador to the UN tries paint China as a human rights abuser.
 

voyager1

Captain
Registered Member
China's response to the EU sanction is actually disproportionately harsh this time, as the following article explains. China invited EU members to visit Xinjiang, but they refused unless they could meet Ilham Tohti, who was serving terms in Chinese prison. This demand was unacceptable for China. Some people might worry that such push-back against EU might jeopardize the EU-China Agreement on Investment. However, for China, on this 120th anniversary of Boxer Protocol, sovereignty and security are priceless.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Yes it is a very disproportionate reslonse as I explained in my earlier posts (major think tank, and committee of EU countries) ambassadors.

However I think this, and in combination with the Alaska words from Yang, means that China is ready to start coming out swinging this time.
Gloves are coming off, dont expect China to lay down now especially with the US weak and the EU in shambles(total economic mess there), while China had kept its powder dry for so long.

China doesn't want a bad relationship with EU but if the EU thinks that they can keep sanctioning China for "genocide" openly and then quitly trading then they are quite delusional lol
 

Petrolicious88

Senior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


US RC-135 Spy Plane came with 25 miles of Chinese mainland. Talk about provocation!

This is days after the Alaska meeting. US is basically saying you (China) may think you came out ahead in that meeting, but we are still the boss.
 

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


US RC-135 Spy Plane came with 25 miles of Chinese mainland. Talk about provocation!

This is days after the Alaska meeting. US is basically saying you (China) may think you came out ahead in that meeting, but we are still the boss.
I would say it’s more like: you can talk the talk but can you walk the walk?
The reason is that the Chinese didn’t do anything that symbolizes any type of firm stance or retaliation, so the US isn’t scared.
 

solarz

Brigadier
It's interesting how when the same arguments the US and China traded in Alaska was also repeated at the UN but there the US ambassador to the UN was an African-American woman who countered China by bringing up how bad black people are treated in the US. You better believe there was anger in Washington that she did that but because she was black they had to bite their tongue. No one is going to tell her to lie to the world how the US can do no wrong. No other American would admit to such a thing. They would go on acting like the US had a perfect record of doing no wrong like Blinken did in Alaska and he felt side-swiped that China brought the US's bad record. You're not going to be hearing about phone calls from Biden scolding his UN ambassador nor a word from Republicans. China should remember that if the US ambassador to the UN tries paint China as a human rights abuser.

When did that happen? How was it a counter to China by bringing up how badly black people are treated in the US?
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This is an example of the arrogance of people who think they're safe. What's Twitter for if not letting everyone know how you feel and are looking for sympathy? They thought they were safe hence why they tweeted it for everyone to know. They knew society was more anti-Asian hence why they thought it was safe to say. They contributed to an environment that hasn't changed from a decade ago and longer. I'm talking also about how Asians in the US think they were safe. If only white people themselves appreciated how much of the benefit of the doubt Asians give them and yet look at how many different type of attackers of anti-Asian hate there are. No good deed goes unpunished because even whites don't recognize how much Asians suck up to them as much as Asians think it makes them safe. My bet that all this attention has actually increased the number of attacks out of spite from how much they hate Asians. Is this the same type of arrogance we see in Hong Kongers where they don't recognize police brutality and Black Lives Matter in the US to where they will side with the white authority in the US instead? And minorities aren't innocent of what they accuse either. When it happens, they get to hide it behind patriotism and the flag and is not seen as racism. Isn't that thinking like a white supremacist? When it comes to China, they see it the way whites see China and why whites hate China is the same reason that goes back to the same reason why whites hated black over 400 years ago. Anti-Asian violence isn't new. The victim culture was designed to ignore everyone else. Only one victim's concern at a time so they can't really complain about how little Asians have helped them because no one else was suppose to have their concerns addressed by how the West's victim culture works. Racism in Great Britain is being brought up because of the Meghan Markle scandal. Like the racism plays no part in how Great Britain treats China today and in the past? And yet not addressed...
 
Last edited:

NiuBiDaRen

Brigadier
Registered Member
Why would China want to do that? The vast majority of overseas Chinese do not have specialized skills that China needs. A mass return to China would only exacerbate social issues.

China already has the thousand talent program, and I'm sure it's doing extremely well right now.
That's a good point you made. Still, there's a lot of Chinese talent in Boston that could be lured back.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Global Britain, Global Delusions​

In a strategic review, the British government says the United States will remain its closest ally because of “shared values” which are allegedly attributed as being democracy, rule of law and human rights.

Far more realistic than these panegyrics is the way Britain and the US routinely trash those purported “shared values” by launching illegal wars of aggression (for example, Iraq, Afghanistan); subvert foreign nations for regime change (for example, Syria, Libya); and arm despotic regimes to the teeth which suppress human rights (for example, Saudi Arabia).

The 111-page British strategic
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
makes for painful yet hilarious reading. It is full of delusional self-flattery.
Another “shared value” is the way Britain and the US gratuitously label other nations as enemies and security threats. This scaremongering is invoked primarily against Russia and China but also other smaller nations like Iran, North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba.
This preposterous demonization of others is of course a form of psychological projection by the British and American ruling class to distract from the fact they are the biggest security threat to the world.

Scaremongering is also an essential precursor for warmongering and the continuance of militarized economies which underpins Anglo-American capitalism. Just imagine if the British and Americans tried to live in peace and cooperation with the rest of the world. Their economies would totally collapse from the absence of militarism and weapons industries.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

© AP Photo / SERGIO DIONISIO

In its so-called strategic review, it is apparent more than ever that the British rulers suffer from delusions of grandeur. Prime Minister Boris Johnson talks fancifully as if Britain is a global dynamo for economic growth and development. No longer content to exaggerate Britain’s international image as “Great Britain”, it is now referred to as “Global Britain”.

This is partly about promoting Britain to the rest of the world to make better its post-Brexit isolation from the European Union. And so by talking up its presumed power “to shape the world”, the British ruling class are obliged to pose as flexing muscles.
This would explain the policy reversal on decreasing its nuclear arsenal. Britain is now planning to increase its stockpile of nuclear warheads over the next decade from around 180 up to 260. This is in violation of Britain’s obligation to disarm under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Johnson talks about Britain being a “beacon of democracy” to the world when in reality it is a rogue state which is dangerously destabilizing international security by its wanton militarism.

On Russia, the British are particularly vociferous, claiming that “Russia will remain the most acute direct threat” to the United Kingdom (Britain’s other fanciful name for itself).

But it does not substantiate what these alleged “full spectrum of threats” from Russia are.
For rogue-state Britain it is apparently sufficient to simply make an accusation and then proceed to “justify” plans for increasing its nuclear arsenal.

Russia and Iran condemned the British state planners for blatant hypocrisy. So should all other nations.
Maria Zakharova, Russia’s foreign ministry spokeswoman, nailed it when she said that Britain’s “imperial ambitions” are based on illusions. It’s as if the arrogant British rulers think they have turned the clock back a 100 years to a time when “the sun never set on their empire”. Even then British power was also over-rated.

1079583283_0:6:3071:2039_3071x2033_80_0_0_3c3d8142831a63e31559a51dd376da6e.jpg.webp

© REUTERS /
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Cafe owner Francini Osorio sprays air sanitiser where he has installed an air purifier and 35 clear shower curtains
Today, Britain may have nominally the fifth-biggest economy in the world, but it also is broken-down nation with rampant poverty and inequality. A third of its children struggle with poverty and hunger, and the numbers are
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Look at the shambles of its public health service, yet its ruling class is planning to spend £24 billion over the next four years to increase its military forces, including the number of nuclear weapons.

The reprehensible and reckless move to increase its nuclear arsenal is an absurd and grotesque waste of public finances. It is criminal in the face of such harrowing social needs among ordinary Britons.

But what’s also criminal is that British rulers are undermining global security – all for the vain purpose of posing as a global power instead of actually being a global power.
Global Britain meaning two aircraft carriers with insufficient jets, and insufficient warships to accompany them. But flexing their possession of multiple aircraft carriers to make up for the pain of a lost empire. Gunboat diplomacy?

Britain looked at its tight finances, and decided: instead of spending money fixing the housing crisis, we're gonna build an extra aircraft carrier like we need an extra testicle.

Really the only purpose of Britain having an extra carrier is for war in the Middle East or permanent station in Asia-Pacific. And the latter appears to be what it's considering. Can't change a leopard's spots. Once a colonizer, always a colonizer.
 
Last edited:
Top