0 members (),
49
guests, and
0
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,128
Posts314,536
Members6,305
|
Most Online294 Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,210 Likes: 3
enthusiast
|
OP
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,210 Likes: 3 |
“ Chunks, a lot of supply chains are snafued right now for a lot of reasons. I don't see why the US has to kowtow to China's every wish. They don't walk on eggshells as far as our feelings are concerned and I think geopolitically it's a bad idea to bow down before the Bear or the Dragon”
That almost sound reasonable. Then one has to look at the tens of thousands dead in Ukraine, millions displaced and Europe’s economy imploding to see it’s not actually reality. Negotiating a security framework would have been better.
But that’s not what we have going on anyway. It looks to be a clash of two economic models. One flailing to hold on to its empire while it hollows itself out. The other a mixed economy that has a firm grasp on keeping the things that are necessary to sustain life public utilities. If the oligarchs can’t control those resources, they’re fine with destroying those countries governments.
I’ll repeat myself and say it’s all well and good (and quit racist) to bomb from the air and kick in doors of underdeveloped non-white countries to maintain empire. It’s another matter trying the same with a peer competitor. We tried that thru are proxy army in Ukraine. My fear is we’re trying it again thru Taiwan.
It’s just been announced we’re sending the Ronald Reagan and it’s battleships/cruisers thru the Taiwan strait in the next couple of weeks.
Also, who made China a peer economic competitor in the first place? Hint:same people who are now trying to provoke it into a military confrontation.
|
|
|
|
|