Miscellaneous News

Overbom said:

Honestly, looking at the mass US hysteria over a single harmless balloon tells me everything I need to know regarding how China should deter the US from starting a war.

Click to expand...

Phead128 said:

Weird, China allegedly doesn't trust NK but they keep on renewing the NATO-style mutual defense treaty in 2006 after 1st nuclear test, 2011 after 2nd nuclear test, 2016 after first Hydrogen bomb test, and 2021 after ICBM test and NK-US rapprochement. Actions speak louder than words...if they don't trust each other, then why renew alliance again and again?

Click to expand...

According to the report, U.S. President Joe Biden had instructed CIA chief William Burns in mid-January to sound out the willingness of Kiev and Moscow to negotiate.

The offer to Kiev had been: peace in exchange for land, the offer to Moscow: land in exchange for peace. The "land" was said to be about 20 percent of Ukrainian territory. Both sides, the two politicians report, refused. The Ukrainians because they are not prepared to have their territory divided, the Russians because they assume that they will win the war in the long run anyway.

If all this is true, the statements would also point to a possible split in the U.S. government over the Ukraine issue. On the one hand, as the two German deputies describe it, there are the security adviser Jake Sullivan and the CIA chief Burns. They wanted to end the war quickly so they could focus on China. On the other side would stand Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. They did not want to let Russia get away with destroying the rules-based peace order and argued for massive military support for Ukraine.

These statements are explosive, on the one hand, because they provide an indirect insight into the views in the White House at the time of Burns' trip. According to the two German foreign policy experts, Biden had wanted to avoid a protracted war in Ukraine and had been prepared to give up parts of the country. If this account is true, Biden would not be alone in his stance in Washington. A new study by the Rand Corporation ("Avoiding a long war"), a renowned American think tank, concludes that "avoiding a long war is a higher priority" for the United States than allowing Ukraine "to control all of its territory."

Click to expand...

ONE FOR ALL AND ALL FOR ONE? Last week’s breakthrough on sending Western-made battle tanks to Ukraine sparked hopes in both Washington and Europe that the tortured transatlantic debate over arming the country had been resolved once and for all.

If only. Just hours after German Chancellor Olaf Scholz cleared the way for the export of German-made tanks to the country, the focus shifted to the who, what, where and when of supplying fighter jets to Ukraine. Once again, Scholz was the first to slam on the brakes, repeatedly warning in recent days of the dangers of “escalation,” while insisting that NATO would not become directly involved in the conflict. If you feel like you’ve seen this movie before, join the club.

There is a new wrinkle though. It turns out that an even bigger fear for Scholz than escalation is that NATO, and in particular the U.S., wouldn’t get involved if Russia were to retaliate against, say Germany. That worry — according to an adviser to the German government — is the reason that Scholz insisted that Washington agree to supply Ukraine with M1 Abrams tanks before the chancellor would lift his veto on delivering German-made Leopard 2 tanks.

What’s an article worth? While the NATO treaty’s Article 5 calls on alliance members to support one another in the event of an attack, it doesn’t require allies to respond with military force. “If the U.S. is involved directly it’s more likely to use military force to defend its allies in Europe,” Carlo Masala, a German military expert with strong ties to the country’s political establishment, said this week on German public television. “That’s a very strong rationale for Scholz and why he insists that the U.S. is involved.”

In other words, Scholz doesn’t trust the U.S.

GERMANY’S DIFFICULT MISSION IN SOUTH AMERICA: German Chancellor Scholz returned this morning from a five-day South America trip which, among other things, was aimed at rallying countries of the Global South behind the West's support for Ukraine. But the visit to Brazil went awry, underlining how challenging it is to build a united global front against Russian President Vladimir Putin and his propaganda.

"If one doesn't want to, two can't fight": That’s the key quote by Brazil's new President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who implied at a joint press conference with Scholz that Ukraine was also responsible for Russia's invasion. "I think the reason for the war between Russia and Ukraine also needs to be clearer. Is it because of NATO? Is it because of territorial claims? Is it because of entry into Europe? The world has little information about that," Lula added.

Pushing Mercosur deal: During his visits to Brazil and Argentina, Scholz also urged a swift ratification of the long-delayed trade and political cooperation deal between the EU and the Mercosur trading bloc of South American countries. However, both Lula and Argentinian President Alberto Fernández told him that while the EU is keen to reinforce the environmental protection clauses of the deal, they want to reopen the (in principle already finalized) agreement to negotiate better trade-offs for their economies.

Click to expand...

Eventine said:

If this isn't a false flag operation, the most likely explanation is that the US is seizing on an usual occurrence (countries spy on each other all the time) to whip the population into a hysteria for war or further punishment of China.

Otherwise I can't see any reason China would send some obviously easy to detect "spy balloon" over US territory.

Click to expand...

ansy1968 said:

If G20 summit is a gauge were the sentiment in ASEAN lies then the answer is obvious, @Overbom bro sorry BUT your view regarding Vietnam and Indonesia alliance against China is few and far between. China is our neighbor and the US is far away, whether we like it or not we are part of Chinese Sphere of Influence, all those noise about access of bases in the Philippine are just noise. A masquerade to hide the true intention of renewing the EDCA agreement which will expire this year, the media bliss is part of US pressure tactic in negotiating with Marcos administration. And accessing is different from a permanent base, the Chinese for decades had live with American permanent presence in Clark and Subic with nuclear weapon deployed. So IF there is an agreement the Chinese won't lost sleep because they have an Escalatory Dominance in the region and those pre positioning of equipment will be useless as the Chinese will attack those bases with impunity.

So what will the Philippines gain? It's all optics design to show that the US is wanted in region which is not, we aren't the one seeking this deal desperately so is SK and others in ASEAN, we want peace in our neighborhood and base on historical fact the Chinese don't have any imperialist agenda.

I think the US are grasping at straws, they are desperate and never feel this vulnerable. They see there is a new kid in town and everybody want to be his friends, the jealousy and hubris had finally dawn on the American, They're not number one anymore and being a bully, without his minions he is nothing.

Click to expand...