Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
Discuss.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX

Larssen wrote:

Some (dilbert) will scoff at this notion but I'd like to remind that innovation in arts, humanities, sciences & social study often run in parallel.
I don't scoff entirely, much of innovation is bringing ideas and ways of thinking from one field into another.

The Chinese are poor at that though, they typically aren't rounded or have much practical experience.
Epstein didn't kill himself
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX
"Currently, with the pandemic still spreading across the world, the most pressing task is to put people's life and health first and work together to defeat the virus," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said.

"At such a critical juncture, it is highly irresponsible to resort to politically motivated suspicion and accusation.

"We advise the Australian side to put aside ideological bias and political games, focus on the welfare of the Australian people and global public health security, follow the international community's collective will for cooperation, and contribute to the global cooperation in fighting the virus, instead of doing things to the contrary."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-26/ … y/12185988
Is it just me or does that sound like a threat?
Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+308|2147
it’s just you.
uziq
Member
+308|2147

Dilbert_X wrote:

It took the dropping of a fusion bomb on Japan for them to accept that fusion with the world order was the better option over world domination.
you are so full of this ahistorical claptrap, i really wonder how you believe the rubbish you spout. you would really do well to take a summer course in a history (or a humanities!) degree to practice what you preach, scoff a little less, and learn how to construe an argument.

it (arguably, at least) took an atomic bomb to stop an imperial, militarised japan with a war government on a war footing, committed to an extreme ideology of racial purity and emperor-worship. of course, you with your racial-essentialist vision of the world see it in simpler terms: the jap menace had to be brought to heel! as if before being terra-formed into a radioactive car park they were some species of dog or were pig ignorant. you evidently have little to no understanding of why japan even adopted an aggressive phase of expansion aided by an extreme form of ethno-nationalism.

ironically japan's own imperial ambitions and efforts at becoming a major power were highly influenced by .... 'the world order' such as it existed in the 19th century. you make it sound as if they were an alien species who had to be talked around to the good old ways of western civilisation. very odd. 'fusion with the world order'. ah, yes, that highly cohesive world order that existed before 1938 or 1894. lol. europe's over-extended and in some cases decaying empires in the far-east were an easy land grab; america's actions in the 19th century could hardly be called non-acquisitive, and were a same response to the waning imperial power of spain (mexico, guam, cuba, puerto rico ... the philippines); japan were already playing the game of the 'world order'.

how is there a comparison with contemporary china in any way? why would china need to be so aggressive and acquisitive? your best explanation thus far seems to be 'they will do it to put down discontent at home', an extremely spurious line of thinking when you're talking about mobilising armies of millions of troops in massive ground wars. china is achieving global pre-eminence through 'soft power' and 'neo-colonial' means in africa and the developing world. they are already one of the heaviest investors in africa -- all that and they have about 2 military bases on the entire continent. japan's expansion and organisation at the turn of the 20th century must be understood in the paradigm of 'the age of empire', not to say in the history of nascent fascism and military-industrialism. china's growth and rise has been achieved almost entirely using the market and trade, not conquest, an option that wasn't available to japan in 1880.

the rules of the game have fundamentally changed since then, and your schoolboy reading on the 'evil axis' and vague gestures towards 'china in 1949', 'japan being nuked' are not going to cut it. like it or not, their syncretic, hybrid, un-pindownable combination of communism and capitalism has lifted the greatest number of people out of poverty in the history of the world, and they haven't had to make military attempts at 'world domination' to do it.

Last edited by uziq (2020-04-26 02:07:55)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX
China doesn't 'need' to be aggressive or acquisitive, except it fits with their worldview.

Does China 'need' Taiwan any more than the UK needs the Isle of Wight? Probably not.
But they'll provoke a war to get it.
Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+308|2147
jesus christ it's like you haven't read the last 3 pages. TAIWAN IS NOT AUSTRALIA.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX
Plenty of trouble ahead

Late on Monday, Hu Xijin, the editor of the state-run Global Times wrote on Weibo that ties between Australia and its largest trading partner, China, were likely to deteriorate as much as relations between Beijing and Washington had.

Criticising Australia for joining the US in its attacks on China, Hu wrote: “After the epidemic, we need to have more risk awareness when doing business with Australia and also when we send our children to study there.”

“Australia is always there, making trouble. It is a bit like chewing gum stuck on the sole of China’s shoes. Sometimes you have to find a stone to rub it off,” Hu said.

Hu’s comments echo that of China’s ambassador to Australia, Jingye Cheng, who told Australian media at the weekend that pushing for an inquiry could result in a boycott of the country’s goods. “Maybe the ordinary people will say ‘Why should we drink Australian wine? Eat Australian beef?’,” Cheng told the Australian Financial Review.

At a briefing on Monday, a spokesman for China’s ministry of foreign affairs, Geng Shuang, described international calls for an inquiry as destined to fail. Without naming Australia specifically, he said: “Some politicians are trying to make political manoeuvres over the origin to smear other countries, but their unpopular attempts will never succeed.”

Geng added: “The urgent task for all countries is focusing on international cooperation rather than pointing fingers, demanding accountability and other non-constructive approaches.”

The origin of the coronavirus has become an increasingly fraught topic as Beijing fights off accusations it is to blame for the pandemic. China has pushed the idea that the virus, first detected in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, may have originated elsewhere, while the US claims it could have leaked from a Chinese lab. In China, all research into the origins of the virus must go through prior vetting as part of a new policy, according to notices seen by the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ … ion-stoush

This has always been China's attitude, this situation has fully revealed it.
We know clearly where we stand.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2020-04-29 01:08:45)

Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+308|2147
best of luck.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX
Its interesting that the Chinese are wholly disinterested in being part of the global community.
They never have been, its crystal clear now.

Personally I think enough people in the world are sufficiently pissed to cut right back on purchasing Chinese products that they're going to be fucked.
People will buy Korean or Japanese before Chinese.

A 20+% drop in GDP is perfectly feasible and will be enough to provoke a revolution or a war.

It would be fun to see Trump say "Guess what? All that debt - we're not repaying it. Thats the price for inflicting Wuhan Bat Flu on us"

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2020-04-29 01:21:25)

Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+308|2147
ah yes, korea and japan, those powerhouses of manufacturing. samsung and sony with their completely in-house electronic supply lines.
Larssen
Member
+32|582
You seem to have trouble separating the words of (state run) media mouthpieces from policy evolution over longer periods of time. It's like reading pravda in 1970s Europe as the be-all end-all indicator of soviet policies..
uziq
Member
+308|2147
dilbert has yellow peril syndrome, it's been obvious for years.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX
Policy evolution doesn't actually predict the future though eh.
Epstein didn't kill himself
uziq
Member
+308|2147
you have no real clue of modern china's history or politics, whereas larssen clearly has a working idea.

you prognosticate based on fears. may as well be reading palms. or, in your case, reading skin colour, as that seems to be the main thing that fuels your imaginary. did you perhaps watch '300' one too many times and took to heart the crude stylization of the dark marauding foreigner?
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX
I'm seeing them taking over island chains and building amphibious assault ships.
https://navaltoday.com/2020/04/24/china … -launched/

For a country which plans to stay within its own borders it sure is expanding its navy and territory.
Epstein didn't kill himself
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+365|2415

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm seeing them taking over island chains and building amphibious assault ships.
https://navaltoday.com/2020/04/24/china … -launched/

For a country which plans to stay within its own borders it sure is expanding its navy and territory.
yeah but america made alliances in the region hundreds of years ago. that makes china stealing shoreline from vietnam okay.
Larssen
Member
+32|582
You all started with the notion that the west will be directly militarily threatened by China so I hope we can consider these last 2 posts a mild retreat. I nor anyone else ever denied there's a possibility for regional conflict.

However, possible does not instantly mean imminent or plausible. Know the difference pls.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+365|2415

Larssen wrote:

You all started with the notion that the west will be directly militarily threatened by China
I did not.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+365|2415
My problem with you and Uzique was that you were both defending China as "a nation of peace" when it clearly isn't.
uziq
Member
+308|2147

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm seeing them taking over island chains and building amphibious assault ships.
https://navaltoday.com/2020/04/24/china … -launched/

For a country which plans to stay within its own borders it sure is expanding its navy and territory.
and we clearly stated that with america's 'pivot to asia' as their main strategy of foreign policy for the early-21st century, china escalating their naval presence is an entirely rational response.

in other news, russia didn't like NATO putting missile installations across its entire western border, either. actions, reactions.

you prefer to think of china like mordor, a place shrouded in shadow full of orc half-men gearing for war.

Last edited by uziq (2020-04-29 06:55:17)

uziq
Member
+308|2147

SuperJail Warden wrote:

My problem with you and Uzique was that you were both defending China as "a nation of peace" when it clearly isn't.
i never said 'nation of peace' and have never called islam a 'religion of peace'. you're ascribing to me whinnying liberal rhetoric that i have never once espoused on this forum. try harder. i said china's impact on geopolitics and its territorial ambitions, throughout most of modern history, have been slight. they have not been expansionist or belligerent in the way that many other world powers have been.

ironically your best riposte is to point to china's regional politics in the era of decolonization. which just enforces my point, really. europe has had the over-extended and meddling hand in world affairs, not china. their ambitions have been slight. which was my precise wording. i never said 'a nation of peace'.
Larssen
Member
+32|582

SuperJail Warden wrote:

My problem with you and Uzique was that you were both defending China as "a nation of peace" when it clearly isn't.
When did I ever claim something like that? All I stated is that their focus is on internal political issues and not what Dilbert thinks. This is objectively true.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX
And so the trade war begins - China doesn't want to buy Australian barley at world-market prices.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-10/ … f/12232426
https://www.afr.com/world/asia/china-la … 119-h181zp
Epstein didn't kill himself
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,698|4801|eXtreme to the maX
12 Years later Malka Leifer has been ruled fit to face eaxtraditions proceedings.

I predict the quid pro quo is Australia will approve Israel annexing the West Bank.
Epstein didn't kill himself
Larssen
Member
+32|582
Your obsession with Israel is so incredibly weird.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2020 Jeff Minard