I think you misread my post and what it is in response to. If anyone is trolling it is the person who puts little effort in understanding a post. BTW all those things you mentioned are actually very trivial and can disappear completely within a few centuries. A few centuries is hardly "here to stay"... but I suppose that's semantics. The only reasonable place to use that phrase "here to stay as a great power" is if the power in question is head and shoulders above all others. Like if they were building skycrapers while everyone else is playing with stones. When you have language, while others are grunting. That's the only place where the statement is valid. USA is so very far from being that much above everyone else. But I agree with US being the dominant power and remaining to be at least for this century.
Trade War with China
- Thread starter Ultra
- Start date
- Status
I think you misread my post and what it is in response to. If anyone is trolling it is the person who puts little effort in understanding a post. BTW all those things you mentioned are actually very trivial and can disappear completely within a few centuries. A few centuries is hardly "here to stay"... but I suppose that's semantics. The only reasonable place to use that phrase "here to stay as a great power" is if the power in question is head and shoulders above all others. Like if they were building skycrapers while everyone else is playing with stones. When you have language, while others are grunting. That's the only place where the statement is valid. USA is so very far from being that much above everyone else. But I agree with US being the dominant power and remaining to be at least for this century.
If we're doing the semantic thing here then perhaps the scope and definition of "great power" needs to be enunciated
1. There can be more than 1 great power in existence
2. The Dictionary definition of a "Great Power" is "a nation or country that has considerable international influence and military strength." so presently all the permanent members of the UN security council are considered "Great Powers", not super powers, hyper powers, hegemonies, rest of the planet are illiterate baboons, but "Great Powers".
So if you've had access to a time machine or magic crystal ball and have popped into the future beyond meaningful extrapolation where the USA no longer meets the accepted definition of a "Great Power" then I wholeheartedly apologise, otherwise creating a false flag situation to justify a point is more or less one of the text book definitions of trolling.
Where have I created a false flag? You need to educate yourself and learn what that means first. No one owns this crystal ball. That is my point. No one knows the future so how can some guy say the USA is here to stay as a great power?
That simple.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I think maybe we should move on from this. There will be no winners in such debates, just like trade wars, the more people drag it on with back and forth, the worse everyone involved end up looking. Better to just stop early before emotions get too heated and the thread gets too derailed.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
To bring things back on topic, I think it’s clear that Trump is using his classic ‘negotiating’ tactics of:
- ridiculous and outrageous demands. He starts from such a ridiculously unrealistic point, and then fight tooth and nail for every ‘concession’ that he hopes the end deal will be pretty much what he wanted to start with.
- his unconventional/bullyboy strong arm tactics whereby he plays every card he can, irrespective of legality (just read up on how his lawyer pretty much openly tells his smaller vendors that yes, Trump is in breach of contract and breaking the law, but they will drag out the legal process so much that it will at best be a Pyrrhic victory for the vendor, or at worst put the vendor out of business before a verdict could be reached). The tarrifs, export ban against ZTE, and unoffical moves against Huawei are all part of his strong arm game.
China’s response has been proportional thus far, but it is hard to see if that is the right choice given the unpredictability of Trump.
Yes, this is unlikely to ‘trigger’ him, but he also has a track record of your typical bullyboy in treating restraint as weakness and only responding to overwhelming force.
I am starting to think China might have had more luck with a massively disproportionate retaliatory tarrif threat.
China should also make backdoor warnings that they are able and willing to ‘play dirty’ if Trump continues to be unreasonable.
- ridiculous and outrageous demands. He starts from such a ridiculously unrealistic point, and then fight tooth and nail for every ‘concession’ that he hopes the end deal will be pretty much what he wanted to start with.
- his unconventional/bullyboy strong arm tactics whereby he plays every card he can, irrespective of legality (just read up on how his lawyer pretty much openly tells his smaller vendors that yes, Trump is in breach of contract and breaking the law, but they will drag out the legal process so much that it will at best be a Pyrrhic victory for the vendor, or at worst put the vendor out of business before a verdict could be reached). The tarrifs, export ban against ZTE, and unoffical moves against Huawei are all part of his strong arm game.
China’s response has been proportional thus far, but it is hard to see if that is the right choice given the unpredictability of Trump.
Yes, this is unlikely to ‘trigger’ him, but he also has a track record of your typical bullyboy in treating restraint as weakness and only responding to overwhelming force.
I am starting to think China might have had more luck with a massively disproportionate retaliatory tarrif threat.
China should also make backdoor warnings that they are able and willing to ‘play dirty’ if Trump continues to be unreasonable.
I am alive, I am staying alive
I am a great power, I am staying a great power
One day I will die
One day I will no longer be a great power
Simple enough.....
Isn't ZTE the one not playing by US sanctions while using their chips is really asking for it. By extension, its actions are reflections of CPC's willingness to overlook NK and Iranian sanctions. I don't think Trump is being unreasonable here unless I'm missing something or a lot.
broadsword
Brigadier
You are projecting the Chinese government's ability to monitor a company's illicit activities. If that was the case, there would be no corporate crimes, at least the major ones. Never underestimate a white collar individual's ability to camouflage his shenanigans.
Jura The idiot
General
- Status