Youtube comments of Alan Friesen (@alanfriesen9837).

  1. 3:25 "Never before has China been so authoritarian." Seriously? Do you know any Chinese history?
    177
  2.  @Rog5446  The Nobel Prize hasn't been about peace in ages. It's about ideological flag planting.
    162
  3.  @_srobona  It's not just China. Human traffickers are literally everywhere.
    93
  4.  @_srobona  Sometimes the line between the two is not that clear. There's an awful lot of money in adoptions, and there are an awful lot of people with no scruples looking for money.
    83
  5. 16:17 "I'm not worried about a second wave happening in China". Must be nice. I'm concerned about a potential fifth wave here in the United States.
    64
  6. Persia, like China, is a perennial superpower. They've had a rough go in this last century, but their influence in the region and the world is steadily increasing. They'll be back to form before you know it.
    59
  7.  @ceceliaellis9916  The women aren't rebelling so much. It's just that now many of them are well educated. They have lives that don't necessarily revolve around the kitchen and they don't want to give those up for some schmuck who can't see the value in a woman in her thirties or forties. There's a huge disconnect between Chinese conservative values and modern Chinese life. Men want to marry women in their twenties. Women want to marry men who are more successful than they are. There are a lot of relationships that fit these criteria but Chinese women are more driven and more successful than they ever have been and because of that there are many people whose lives have taken them out of these marriageable categories. At some point people are going to have to compromise or give up on the traditional family model. Of course, their families are going to be pushing hard for the former over the latter.
    56
  8. It's funny how some equate "not making a country choose a system" with "exporting their system".
    44
  9.  @deschan2246  A developing country that is several times as powerful and important as France.
    37
  10. Seems pretty lenient. I don't wish any undue suffering for them but I do hope this gets their attention and leads them to a less confrontational future.
    37
  11. Man, it would sure be nice to see China and Japan getting along better going forward. I hope these initial niceties don't die out completely.
    33
  12. I suppose it has a lot to do with our different political systems, but it's interesting that the Chinese don't appear to be returning personal insults. It does make the Chinese look like the grown-ups. Of course, I don't speak Mandarin, so I don't know what they're telling their own people.
    32
  13.  @finntexbuild4809  You're half right. The Soviet Union attacked Finland in an attempt to take back territory that had been part of the Russian empire before WWI. But Hitler's Germany was Finland's chief ally and had a relationship with Finland not unlike the current relationship between NATO and Ukraine.
    31
  14. I'm not a scientist but it seems to me that if you take an object whose opaque components are compacted into a sphere, like a planet, and crushed it into dust which spreads out that the total light blocked by the dust would be greater than that blocked by the sphere where so much more of the matter is in the shadow of the object's surface by a large order of magnitude. If you had two gas giants collide there would result an awful lot of previously in-the-dark matter newly exposed to (and blocking) the star's light.
    29
  15. It can be a little embarrassing these days, but it's still a beautiful country. And we won't always be run be a bunch of dipshits.
    26
  16. This is great. Now we have a working model that we can analyze and determine whether the pros outweigh the cons.
    25
  17.  @someguy3766  NATO is only bound if the United States is attacked first. If the U.S. attacks, our NATO allies are not required to fight (see Vietnam War/Iraq War).
    25
  18.  @americanpatriot126  Considering he's in Vancouver right now I think he's more likely to get arrested if he angers the United States.
    25
  19. Why do you assume that Japan, South Korea and the Philippines would want to alienate themselves from their top trading partner? Do you really think any of these countries want to get dragged into a war with China when one of the others comes crossways with them? Within ten years China is likely going to be the equal of the United States in the Western Pacific. The retaking of Taiwan is a given sometime within the next three decades. That kind of alliance might make sense over the next ten years, but beyond that it would be extremely foolish. I don't see any East Asian countries being daft enough to promise to go to war with China for the benefit of any other.
    25
  20. And considering that the United States is the world's third most populace country…,
    24
  21.  @hendrikdependrik1891  Are you sure China would want to expand north? There are potential claims in Mongolia and the Lake Baikal area, but what might be more likely is for China to prop up new countries based on the Asiatic ethnicities in Siberia. You might see a Yakut state or an Evenki state.
    22
  22.  @beentrill8492  "who would invest in China?" Right now it's one of the most functional economies in the world.
    22
  23. The German navy at Jutland was only a four decades old. The Japanese Imperial Navy was developed in the 1870s as well.
    21
  24. It's not just a Russian thing. Military history is filled with powers that got embarrassed in the beginning of a conflict, but eventually got their act together and crushed their adversaries.
    19
  25.  @pavlom4745  Hungary occasionally tested its limits of independence from Moscow, sometimes with a modicum of success, other times with Soviet tanks on the street. He's suggesting that Hungary is reluctant to toe anyone's line uncritically.
    19
  26.  @annan7728  Yeah, I miss the days when Deutsche Welle could be counted on to do thorough and fair-minded expositions. These last few years it seems like they're all about hit pieces.
    19
  27.  @paulafortin3811  He's not necessarily weak because he is soft-spoken. He is weak because he is dependent on the support of six different parties. This means he's going to be pulled in multiple directions all the time and he'll be spending most of his rule trying to preserve it by herding his cats.
    18
  28. The Nobel Peace Prize has been the Nobel Politics Prize for some time. If it was really about peace, it would never ever be given to somebody with separatist ambitions because separatism usually leads to war.
    17
  29. I suspect China is concentrating on development rather than on mission. In part because of the costs of these ships I doubt that China will produce more than one of any design until they feel like it can go toe-to-toe with the American equivalent.
    17
  30.  @andia968  McDonald's may decide their presence in China is more valuable than their potential consequences in the United States. After all, Americans love to talk about how much they hate McDonald's, but they still buy their food.
    16
  31. If Finnish armies started showing up in Lithuania in this scenario, I think it's likely that Russia would attack Finland itself.
    15
  32.  @bendyStraws3Lz  The policy of the CCP is to first take care of China and then worry about the rest of the world. This is similar to our policy here in the United States.
    15
  33.  @grospipo20  Reality makes fools out of prognosticators. I don't think China is all that fragile. They have a very strong domestic market and right now they are exporting food, in part due to breakthroughs in agricultural technology that they themselves pioneered. They do import a lot of food as well but some of that is for reasons of trade balance. Their biggest weakness is energy but they've made great strides in that direction also. Right now the Chinese people trust the CCP to a degree wholly enviable in the west. So long as that trust is maintained I only see China growing stronger.
    15
  34.  @nikw3026  Your analysis is not correct. Labor, like anything else, is priced by demand, not by difficulty. Some jobs are in high demand partly because of their difficulty, others because of their tedium, and others because of their risk. Some jobs are in high demand because social structures only allow those with special connections or special characteristics into that line of work.
    15
  35. There is a difference between Russia stationing Russian troops in Russia and non-Ukrainian countries stationing non-Ukrainian troops in Ukraine.
    14
  36.  @Jumptohistory  Not in the great game.
    14
  37. With the one example we have, out of one billion years of complex life forms with god knows how many species we are aware of 1 species that has the intelligence and life cycle necessary to establish civilization. That species has been establishing and maintaining civilizations for let's generously say 10,000 years. Of course there are a hell of a lot of planets out there also.
    13
  38. I've about had it with Blinken. The fool is trying to get us into a war.
    12
  39. Sun Tzu described the importance of given a defender an escape route so that they would not fight with the determination of the doomed. Of course, Sun Tzu was about winning with as few casualties as possible. He put a lot of emphasis on controlling terrain and making sure one fought were the terrain favored them. If Russia is fighting with limited manpower, and I think we can all agree that that is the case, then allowing a city's defenders an exit route may very well be the best way to take control of a region without sacrificing all of an army's troops, so long as they can make sure that it's a one-way street.
    12
  40.  @robbrown4621  The term he used was formidable. Are you suggesting the German navy was not formidable?
    12
  41. I think I fall ideologically between the Professor and Dr. Reich. There are things I disagree with with each of them, but I also think they both have some very good points. I'd love to see them debate each other.
    12
  42. I think the reason there is so much vitriol towards vegans from those of us who dearly love meat and seafood is based on fear and resentment. We're afraid of being labeled as evil; we recognize that animal suffering and death are requisite in our diet and we're worried that at some point someone is going to try to force us to eliminate the part of our diet that we enjoy the most. We also resent the way we perceive, rightly or wrongly, that vegetarians and vegans feel like they are morally superior to those that eat meat and use animal products. For the most part people who choose a restricted diet are rarely pushy about it, but as this comment section shows, many are very touchy about any criticism of the merits of their choice. Most people who have not chosen a restricted diet don't really care that much about those who do, but will get annoyed if they have to make special arrangements for somebody's diet especially if it's by choice. And of course there are people who are just jerks and will attack anyone who they can because they enjoy the feeling of belittling someone they disagree with. Unfortunately I sometimes fall into that category myself especially if I think somebody is making a stand merely because it's trendy. Off the subject, I know vegans don't do leather, how do they feel about the use of silk?
    11
  43. You know what? No. The officer shouldn't have shot him and he shouldn't have died. I'm really disappointed by the sentiments displayed here. For those who have sympathy for the cop who's freedom was on the line in this trial; where's your sympathy for the average guy whose life was taken away by a jittery cop?
    11
  44.  @beniaminosani2719  We in The United States regularly overestimate the amount of people that we think agree with us. We listen to the relatively well-off (middle and upper—professional—classes), including the expat community, and assume that they speak for the majority. It's not that these people aren't important, but they have much more bark than bite. In most countries the working class, in some cases the underclass, is much larger and the military is much more powerful, and they're usually not friendly towards their bourgeois countrymen. These groups can be overpowered, like in Iraq or Libya, but the results are still terribly messy and rarely lead to the healthy liberal democracies that Americans and like-minded allies think they're helping to create.
    11
  45. I think the real question is: which side would the United States blindly support and supply?
    11
  46. @Let's Travel It was Germany's attempt to cozy up to Britain that broke up Bismark's Three Emperors' League. The British rejected the German overtures and the Germans ended up with a two front scenario.
    11
  47. Israel is on Israel's side. They look after themselves—as they should.
    11
  48.  @silmerusse  Most of us are ignorant and brainwashed. I appreciate the sympathy.
    11
  49.  @wread1982  If you're the only one who's not racist, than you sure seem pretty oblivious to the ubiquity of it in American society. Racism isn't about hating people of a different race (though that would certainly be a sign of racism), it's about holding people of another race back—keeping them in their place, so to speak. And the attitude of most Americans is one of western superiority, particularly the superiority of western values. This leads directly to actions and sentiments aimed at denying East Asian societies the opportunity to surpass in strength and development the champions of the western model. For those who associate the west with the white race and East Asia with a non-white race, this is big picture racism. Those that intentionally hold back the opportunities of individuals of East Asian heritage (or attack them) because they "look Chinese", that is small picture racism. Both count as racism.
    11
  50. For all the hand-wringing about Japan I haven't seen a lot of suffering related to their condition. Perhaps it's time to reassess the importance of growth. I think the economist's admission that inequality makes it a problem is telling.
    11
  51. No, his offense is declaring that we haven't as yet solved the problems of institutional inequality and human misery so we shouldn't try. He's entitled to his opinion, but some of us have higher aspirations for humanity.
    11
  52. True, they also underestimate China and Russia.
    10
  53. Same goes for China and the United States.
    10
  54.  @abraham2172  The EU has the same problems that the Holy Roman Empire had or that the American states had under the Articles of Confederation. If a United Europe formed up with a strong central government then they would be a superpower rivaling the United States and China. They would certainly surpass the power of Russia. But until they do, they will not be a superpower. Of course, many Europeans don't want to be a superpower. And Russia absolutely doesn't want them to become one.
    10
  55. I find this quite likely. I think American intelligence, consisting largely of old Cold Warriors, is providing the narrative in the state department and they are getting quite anxious to square off with China now while they still think there is a chance of victory. I think clandestine activities in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Tibet are designed to get global support against China during such a conflict along with the blame narrative around COVID.
    10
  56.  @drunkensailor3736  They have no wish to get rid of the Uighur people. They want to stop the terrorism that's run rampant in Xinjiang and suppress the Uighur separatist movement. We can argue about what degree of anti-separatist techniques are acceptable, but let's not call it genocide, because it's not.
    10
  57. All animals are made mostly of water which is non-compressible. I would think that the pressure would be felt in the human body only in the places that had non-aqueous structure, like the lungs and the inner ear and perhaps cartilage and maybe fat deposits. It would be interesting to see if anybody has done any deep-see testing with cadavers or other human analogs to see what parts of the body are actually affected.
    10
  58.  @JonathanHanleyIRE  Though I am for the most part an admirer of President Obama, I can't help but agree that that particular award was an embarrassing farce.
    10
  59.  @timothymcgee871  You and those like you are small-minded pathetic gits. The current Chinese regime has done more for humanity than any other current regime with the possible exception of that of the United States. By all means root for America, but don't hate on China, unless you're a jerk.
    10
  60. The problem with this is that equity of result, while extreme, is not morally repugnant in the way that racism and xenophobia are. The far left lacks the cruelty agenda that would make walling them off seem reasonable to those of us in the moderate left. And while we definitely disavow those acting violently to promote their agenda, that's such a small sliver of the left as to be practically negligible. That's not to say that the moderate left and the far left get along. We don't, and it's tearing the Democratic party apart. But nobody in the moderate wing thinks that the hard-core progressives are anything remotely comparable to the alt-right and because of that we're not going to see them pilloried by the "reasonable" left.
    10
  61.  @jaredgomora6506  Prisoner exchange is not uncommon where spies are concerned.
    10
  62. "When you're a professional pirate…"
    10
  63. This is what Harry gets for taking Ginny over Cho.
    9
  64.  @starbase218  Yes, very few westerners understand what Russia is fighting for. Russia has watched its influence wane in eastern Europe steadily since 1991. When the Soviet Union collapsed and Russia took on the trappings of a democracy the country became necrotic and weak. At the beginning of the current century Russia began repairing the damage of the Yeltsin administration, but it did so at cost of liberal democratic values. At the same time NATO was expanding east and the countries that Russia had some influence in were having that influence squeezed out by a combination of examples of western affluence, negative historical memory, and pro-western and anti Russian messaging and political support by the United States and her allies. Russian concerns were ignored by a western polity that viewed Russia as weak, corrupt and increasingly authoritarian. In short, the west was demonstrating that it had no respect at all for Russia. What's happened now is that Russia perceives itself as strong enough to push back, at least in a third country. Russia found success against the west in Syria, and hoped that they could similarly find success in the largest European country outside of Russia that wasn't already in NATO's bed. What Russia is fighting for is Great Power Status. If they win this war, they will continue to be a great power. If they lose this war, they will be relegated to middling power status. And while most westerners feel that Russia should be content with middling power status, President Putin and his allies within Russia will not allow this if they can prevent it by any means at their disposal. I don't know if the Russians are considering this in their calculus, but accepting middling power status not only means extreme loss of prestige, but it also means increased vulnerability to American state-breaking operations like promotion of color revolutions and/or establishment and support of ethnic nationalist movements. Losing this contest really is an existential threat. This is not to say that one should side with Russia in this conflict. While the Russians are understandably fighting for their status, and in the long run their survival, in the world, the Ukrainians are fighting for their homes, their people, their territorial sovereignty, and their survival in the short run. In my opinion one should always have a degree of sympathy for the invaded over the invaders, all else being equal. I do think it's okay to sympathize with one side over the other, but it's important to understand the reasons both sides have for fighting, and to understand it at a level a step above declaring the leader of a side to be a monster or crazy or a puppet, etc. There are justifications for the actions of all parties.
    9
  65. Perhaps the only way the battle would have been possible would be through alliances. You could have a scenario where the Romans and the Persians had an alliance and the Chinese and the Bactrians had an alliance and the two forces each made up of two armies faced off somewhere in Transoxiana.
    9
  66.  @joesterling4299  Putin is no Hitler, and he's no Stalin either. He's following most closely in the footsteps of Csar Peter. Whether or not he has the resources and ability to live up to that model is still yet to be determined. He, like Peter, is working against a very strong tide.
    9
  67.  lizardking3979  "Tibets, Uigars and mongols treated equally??"—actually they're treated preferentially.
    9
  68.  @tetashome  Taiwan has been part of China since the 17th century.
    9
  69. I'm a Pete supporter myself. And while I have some reservations about the UBI proposal Andrew Yang was advocating, I very much appreciate the fact that he recognized and pointed out the challenges we face as a country and as a species regarding the fourth industrial revolution and the victims now and coming of automation. I don't think anybody else running was willing to admit the scope of this issue or to suggest any kind of action to address it. I find Yang to be highly intelligent and I think his perception is important. I also really appreciate the fact that he didn't try to undermine the other Democratic candidates. I hope we have not seen the last of Andrew Yang.
    9
  70. The thing about a nuclear attack on naval assets is that two can play at that game. And while China might get more bang for the buck as they destroy the larger of the two navies, they still need to be able to sustain supply lines across a body of water, and they'll need surface vessels to counter U.S. submarines. I don't know if we're underestimating the Chinese or not. The American military is the more powerful of the two, but China is playing on their home turf and that makes a difference. I think if the United States is serious about militarily thwarting a Chinese military reunification operation, then they should war game on the assumption that Japan and Korea do not get drawn into the conflict, not because they won't, but because they might not. The ROK has everything to lose from going to war with China. China may not be able to get the entire PLA in place in Taiwan, but if they felt that the Koreans were aiding and abetting their enemy, they could dump the entire PLA into Korea. Japan is less vulnerable and would be harder to dissuade from involvement, but if China won the war and Japan was seen as a belligerent, trade from Japan through the straits of Malacca would probably be entirely choked off until the Chinese grew tired of punishing them. It certainly wouldn't be a fait accompli, but it should definitely be a consideration to the strategists and politicians in Japan. Because of this, the U.S. needs to know if it can win without direct involvement from these two allies. Conversely, the Chinese should be war-gaming on the assumption that Japan and Korea do participate against them.
    9
  71. It would be a lot more balanced if you had more than one viewpoint. The interviewee seems competent enough, but getting a Chinese analyst to represent China's view of these situations would make for a more credible overall presentation.
    9
  72.  @ihl0700677525  You're right. It also didn't prevent either the various wars in Asia that defined the Great Game between Russia and Britain (yes, I'm aware you mentioned the Crimean War), nor did it prevent the Franco-Prussian War between France and Germany. While there was plenty of suffering in these and other conflicts and I'm sure it comes to no comfort for the war dead and disabled, it generally credited with preventing anything on the scale of the Napoleonic Wars until August of 1914—about a hundred years. Whether or not you think this qualifies as successful, I think one could easily question that. I think it is a better blueprint than the unipolar world that we lived through in the nineties (and we Americans seem to be vainly trying to recover) or the bipolar model of the Cold War which we Americans seem to be accepting as the next best option. I think that the Concert of Europe was a little too chaotic, but no powerful country willingly gives up any of its sovereignty so it may be the best choice going forward, or at least that's what the Russians think.
    9
  73.  @ihl0700677525  Sometimes that bar for hurting America is pretty low—nationalizing one's oil for instance, or organizing fruit laborers, electing a left-leaning politician or, what was it Libya did to us again? Americans don't like the words that describe our actions so we don't call wars a war, we don't call coercion coercion, and we don't refer to imperialism as imperialism. We come up with terms like "police action", "sanctions", and "soft power" and we minimize the consequences born by the subjects of our policies and activities. This eases the conscience of the average American and allows them to believe that they are isolationists. But we're not. We want to tell what the world what to do and we don't want any lip from them. After all, that would be defined as hurting American interests.
    9
  74. Is this supposed to be sarcastic?
    9
  75. I'm really happy that we live in a time where an operation that complicated can actually succeed.
    9
  76.  @Xaiando  I don't think flipping someone off is considered to be sufficiently aggressive to incite retribution. There's a certain level of insult that people are expected to endure in society.
    9
  77. The Russians didn't lose any substantial territory in this war. Their main concession was acceptance that the Black Sea was an international waterway.
    9
  78. There's very little that is realistic about this scenario. China has no beef with Singapore. In fact Singapore is probably one of the most China-friendly polities in the region. So if you can imagine China attacking Singapore, you can imagine Malaysia not getting involved.
    9
  79. I think you've described modern nationalism.
    9
  80.  Shelley Fitch  China did create the shortage, as you said, with the one-child policy which rammed full force against the Confucian tradition of male child preference. They also exacerbated the problem by affording economic opportunities for women that allowed them to be independent adults. From the perspective of the country, these are unfortunate growing pains that come with graduating into a modern enlightened society, and from the country's perspective it's very much worth it. That's not to say that there isn't a lot of individual suffering during this transition.
    9
  81. Thank you very much, this was helpful.
    8
  82. While the Chinese system is not perfect, and it's not really compatible in its entirety with the U.S. Constitution, it is currently doing an excellent job of improving the lives of the people of China. And while it shouldn't be adopted wholesale in the United States, it should be examined less critically for ways that it could show us how to potentially improve our own peoples lives, but unfortunately—exceptionalistic ideology…, oh yeah, and racism.
    8
  83. Foreign adoption leads to kidnapping and strong-arming vulnerable families. Most of the adopters are probably unaware of this, either because they can't see or because they don't want to look. There is also a tendency for adopters to tell the children that they were unwanted because it makes them feel better, even though it traumatizes the kids.
    8
  84. "They need real ethnic borders with autonomy." No, that's how they stay weak and abused. What this area needs is a strong enough government to build a multinational empire. They need the local equivalent of a Josip Tito that can suppress tribalism, integrate the people thoroughly, tell democracy and the corruption that comes with it that this ain't the time or place, and start building up the country's industry making sure that it extends out into the hinterlands so that the rural areas feel connected to the urban areas. Oh yeah, and drive every vestige of Western influence out until we stop supporting separatist movements around the world.
    8
  85.  @agris8859  Russia had a friendly relationship with the Ukraine and then there was a western-backed coup three months before an election that probably would have seen a change of government anyway. Russia is being aggressive and hopefully it doesn't lead to war. I don't think it will unless it looks like Ukraine is likely to join either NATO, the EU or both. These are very real and very understandable Russian red lines that the west, primarily the U.S., is seemingly unwilling to recognize. Russia has made sure that there is enough chaos in Ukraine to presumably keep these applications at bay. The west's triumphalist disrespect for Russia and their utter disregard for Russian security concerns now and over the last three decades is the primary driver for this conflict, but Russia's treatment of Ukraine has admittedly been far from fraternal.
    8
  86. It's all about political sympathies, a fault that I share as well. I am highly sympathetic to the anti-racist movement here in the United States, while at the same time I have precious little sympathy for the movement in Hong Kong. It's hard for me to drop my political blinders and recognize the similarities between the movements, even though they are obvious. I don't think protest in general is effective at causing positive change. I feel like the Civil Rights marches in the sixties were a bit of an outlier. I think in both the cases mentioned above the gains made by those at the start of the movements have been lost by the anger against those that have overplayed it. This is particularly tragic in the United States where the treatment of black Americans (particularly black men) is unforgivable and desperately in need of change.
    8
  87. Yeah, when he said that China is a horrendously poor country he kind of lost me.
    8
  88. How in the world is China a threat to Western Democracies? China has expressed no intention to export its political system. China engages diplomatically and economically with any willing nation regardless of political system. China has no conceivable military designs on Europe or the Americas. What exactly is the threat?
    8
  89.  @Jznyan  We thought they were lying, but now I don't know.
    8
  90. The difference being that this guy has a political history in the West Virginia legislature advocating for labor, education, care for veterans and antipoverty in a real world setting. He's walked the walk.
    8
  91. "Taiwan DPP is pressing for war and destruction of Taiwan Island." That's what I don't understand. Taiwan is looking oblivion straight in the eye and I don't know why they either can't recognize the threat or they are willing to die and drag their families through the horror that would obviously accompany a violent repossession of the island. Living in China is not that bad. The Chinese living in major Chinese cities have lives that are just as rich, fulfilling and pleasant as those living in Taipei. And while I understand the desire to fight for and keep the trappings of democracy, those things are far more likely to be preserved (as well as an amnesty more likely to be produced) by actively negotiating a peaceful reunion than by forcing a violent one.
    8
  92. What's really sad is that none of this was necessary. Western support of opposition has predictably led to chaos which would still be present even if Assad had been removed early on (see Libya). Instead of pushing so hard for the removal of leaders we don't like we should be trying to help these leaders meet the needs of their people.
    8
  93. The Chinese have used military expansion when it suited them.
    8
  94. When you say "Toddlers", do you mean chronologically or developmentally?
    7
  95. It's good to see that not every politician in Taiwan is a western puppet. I'm sure he won't win, and businessmen aren't usually very good leaders, but Taiwan's best future course is peaceful reunification, and this guy understands it. I applaud him for at least being willing to bring this realization to the public forum.
    7
  96. Imagine taking military advice from Boris Johnson. It makes one shudder.
    7
  97.  @Robertsmith001  That would be great for the Indian people.
    7
  98. That's not the Chinese business model. That's the model of any country that needs to move out of the third world and into the first. Industrial espionage provides so much better an investment return than cutting edge R&D that any country behind the technological curve that doesn't employ such a tactic is grossly negligent. China's now approaching that technologically advanced state where there's not much left to steal and their cranking up their R&D budgets because, at this point, that's the only way forward. They'll find that other countries are going to be stealing from them and they'll get their knickers in the same twist that the U.S., Europe, Japan and Korea have gotten theirs into soon enough.
    7
  99. The U.S. policy vis-a-vis Taiwan has been intentional ambiguity for several decades. The U.S. goal in the region has been to avoid a war at all costs. Because of this, the United States has consistently pressured Taiwan against any declaration of independence, something the PRC has stated that it will not tolerate. Chinese investment in air and sea power make American defense of the island more costly and less likely to succeed with every passing year and American military experts are aware of this. Whether the U.S. would defend Taiwan during a Chinese invasion would probably depend today on what other global obligations America was dealing with but over time that will matter less and less. I think that Taiwan is going to be reunited into the mainland whether they like it or not but China is not going to invade in the short term unless the government in Taipei blatantly disregards American instructions, at which point America might well be unwilling to shed blood to defend them. If there is no short term invasion then eventually the military balance of power in the region between the U.S. and China will move towards equalization. Once that occurs China will probably enforce its claim and the United States will limit it's defense of Taiwan to angry rhetoric and possible economic sanctions.
    7
  100. I think most non-westerners who are pushing against their governments assume that western journalists will be sympathetic to their point of view and accommodating in their treatment. In most cases I think they are correct in that assumption, but when they meet a genuinely neutral and intensively professional questioner they often come off as very flat-footed. In fairness, I would be equally likely to wilt under this level of questioning.
    7
  101. I love McDonald's, but don't confuse this with activism. The extant of their polical message was "Please don't boycott me in the United States and western Europe!"
    7
  102. They made an economic choice that they were better off trading with Mainland China than they were trading with Taiwan. One of the disadvantages of being small and weak is that you have to ride the waves instead of plowing through them.
    7
  103. It's been a joke for a few years now.
    7
  104.  @Helena_McNeal  Disney has always written it's female characters according to the standards of the day. I get annoyed at people who criticize the lack of girl power displayed by Snow White. The movie's a classic and had it been written with an aggressive heroine at its core it would have failed at the box office and there wouldn't be a Disney today. I love the new movies too but you have to appreciate the old films in their terms.
    7
  105. United we bargain, divided we beg. (I can't take credit for that one. I saw it on a bumper sticker attached to a locker door)
    7
  106.  @ihl0700677525  Well, most Americans don't think of our empire as an empire, which it most certainly is. Most Americans view extraterritorial role in the world as an intended if not sometimes misguided force for good that helps people in other countries achieve what's most important to them—namely liberal democracy and self determination. There is a genuine sense of isolationism, particularly regarding funding. We don't want our tax money going to foreigners unless it's to help them adopt a politically acceptable form of government which I've already mentioned. Some of the more politically astute Americans recognize that what we use our power and influence for in the world is to maintain our power and influence, and a select few have weaponized the naivety of the general population to personally profit or to undermine political opponents both foreign and domestic. But very few Americans want to see the United States back off it means countries like China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela or Cuba are allowed to make their own decisions unless those decisions move them towards liberal democratic government and supplication to western journalism.
    7
  107. I appreciate the pushback of the interviewer against this conspiracy theorist. It would have been nice to have a non-China-bashing China expert on or maybe a Chinese representative to answer these concerns.
    7
  108.  @robbrown4621  Absolutely agree. If you're going to kill the king, kill the king.
    7
  109. The problem with the Honorable Member, Mr Galloway is that while he brings up some very good points on Western hypocrisy and Chinese strength and solvency and a few other issues, he immerses his valid points in a soup of character attacks on his fellow panelists and absurdities regarding history and western politics. While the smugness of the academics on the panel is almost certainly infuriating to him his back-lot combative approach makes it hard to take his argument seriously. I agree with much of what he says. I just wish he would project his points in a more dignified manner because voices like his are needed in the West.
    7
  110.  @DavidAdkins78  I'll take that Ponzi scheme. It's held for what, eighty years now? And before that the elderly had to move in with their children. Social Security and pensions are what give most of us dignity in our old age.
    7
  111. Sorry about being a jerk guys, but damn our military is awesome.
    7
  112. If you look at China throughout its history it gradually grows from the Upper Huanghe basin into the colossus that it is today expanding with every dynasty during it's early years when the army was strong and the emperors were engaged. All of those growth spurts occurred at the edge of a sword or at least at the credible threat of such. I don't think China has a particularly violent history. In fact it's tendency to have long periods of relative political stability makes it a lot less violent historically than more typically fragmented regions like say, Europe, but to suggest that military expansion was rare is historically inaccurate. It is true that Imperial China commonly used soft power methods to spread its influence beyond its military reach particularly through the spread of writing, Confucianism and other philosophical treatises like Sun Tzu's "Art of War". I think in the future China will be able to use similar tools around the world and I think the world will benefit for it. But people are people and rulers are rulers and where the state's interests are best served through the projection of force, force will be projected.
    7
  113. The thing I really like about Confucianism is that it is humanist. It's all about doing your part to make society better because that's the right thing to do, not because it pleases some deity. I think it is undeniably one of the most important ingredients to China's long term success over the last two millennia and change. I like the fact that it's not really religious even though Chinese regularly pray to Confucius which is mostly to do with his position as an honorary ancestor to everyone in China. The biggest problem I have with Confucianism is the subservient position it places on women. However, I think that's changeable. Confucianism has been overhauled once to the long-term benefit of China during the Song Dynasty and once to the long-term detriment of China during the Ming Dynasty. In order for it to fully benefit China in the future it'll need to be similarly overhauled again and gender equality could and should be incorporated into that overhaul.
    7
  114. I'm not sure why we have to limit ourselves to either planets or spaceships. In the short term space stations probably would be easier but they will always be dependent on imported material for growth and replenishment of lost resources. Eventually, planetary colonies will be able to use local resources for sustenance and growth of population and industry which would be more efficient and forgiving for the colonists. I think we should be colonizing everything in the solar system that we can including the empty space between things. I think Luna is the place to start and I think Venus will be the best location outside Earth in the long run. As an aside, I think Luna has a militarily strategic aspect that could make it easier to secure funding for. It is, after all, the only satellite that can't be blown out of the sky.
    6
  115. Not much of a fan of Jefferson but Trump is certainly a blemish on the office of my presidential pantheon, Washington & Adams, Lincoln, Roosevelt and Johnson. He seems to have channeled the worst aspects of Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, Nevelle Chamberlain and Marie Antoinette. I'm not sure he's channeled the best aspects of anyone.
    6
  116.  Doglover extrem  Underestimate Russia at your peril. Russia is never as weak as she looks.
    6
  117.  @bonehand87  Your historical assessment skills are as impressive as your math skills.
    6
  118.  @romulusmax9911  "Knowingly covering up the gravity of the outbreak" is a serious accusation that I've seen no evidence for. What's yours.
    6
  119.  @jeremypearson6852  I respectfully disagree—I think there is plenty of room in the middle.
    6
  120.  @matthiuskoenig3378  Excellent takeaway.
    6
  121.  @RandomBb56  "How the hell do you think China has that huge territory." Typically, China grows when someone on the fringe of China takes over China and then declares all of its territory to now be China. This was the case with the First Emperor whose power base was on the far western fringe. There have been some exceptions to this. The Han expanded into Korea and Vietnam, but those territories were withdrawn from by the time the Tang took control. Taiwan became part of China when Ming loyalists fled Qing conquest and then became an un-ignorable nuisance as a pirate haven, which led the Qing to take the island in the seventeenth century. Tibet, Xinjiang and Mongolia all became part of China when the Mongols conquered it. These regions lost Chinese identity under the Ming, but were brought back into the fold by the Manchu conquerors—the aforementioned Qing. When the Qing collapsed and China was divided by warlords, two of whom were Chiang Kai-shek and Mao Tsedong, China lost control of everything. They finally got it all back, except for Outer Mongolia and Tibet, at the end of World War Two, but the Chinese Civil War was still going on. Once Chiang's forces fled to Taiwan and the U.S. Navy made it clear that the communists were not going to be allowed to cross (China can thank Korea for that re-prioritization), China reestablished its control of Tibet. A few years later, the young Dalai Lama (or more accurately his courtiers and handlers) revolted unsuccessfully and ended up fleeing Potala Palace and establishing a government in exile in India.
    6
  122.  @zilun  Chinese history doesn't begin with the establishment of the People's Republic.
    6
  123. Now everyone in China is enjoying the freedom that comes with economic development and poverty alleviation. It's time to start pursuing that kind of freedom in the United States.
    6
  124. In the late eighties I felt like the Americans and the Soviets were getting closer to an understanding and that global cooperation was approaching a reality. Perhaps I was naive, after all I was a teenager, but I really felt like the collapse of the Soviet Union was a tragedy, and I really couldn't understand why everyone else was so pleased to watch a modern empire collapse and to see a drunken imbecile become the leader of the largest remaining section. This was followed up a few years later by the tragic dissolution of Yugoslavia and the suffering unleashed by the forces of nationalism unrestrained. While I rejoiced (and still do) at the reunification of Germany I just couldn't agree that that the fallout from the collapse of the second world was good for humanity on the whole. It didn't lead to world peace. In fact, I think world peace was more likely with a collegiate triumvirate of the West, the Soviets and the Chinese, which I felt was within our grasp in the mid-to-late eighties. Since then America and the West has suffered from insufferable hubris and the rest of the world has suffered from insufferable American hubris and the policies resulting from an ideology that insists on western values even if it comes at the price of abject misery. America and the West have given the world much and are very capable of being both a shining example and a good helpful friend. But we can't be that if our primary (or any order of) business is to stamp out anything that doesn't look like us.
    6
  125. In fairness she didn't receive it for Rohingya genocidal cleansing, she got involved in that afterwards. The same argument goes for Obama who was awarded the prize for being not-Bush before he was in a position to order drone attacks.
    6
  126. He's forgetting to include those who chose not to vote when there was a reasonable alternative.
    6
  127. For better or worse, I disagree with your assessment. Russia's economy is on a war footing and has increased by 26.2% this year according to CEPA. This rate of growth is not sustainable, but neither is that growth rate necessary for Russia to support its war or for Russians to support their government. Russia is not isolated from the second, fifth, or eighth largest economies in the world. Being that Russia has pretty much everything it needs within its borders and is also able to trade with China, India and Brazil, means that they can import and export what they need to operate pretty much indefinitely. As for your history, Russia was raped after the fall of the Soviet Union by rapacious opportunists from outside and from within. Russia went into third-world status and remained there during the Yeltsin regime. Putin may be a dictator and he may be an asshole (no argument from me on that), but he brought Russia back to the big kids table and the people of Russia appreciate being able to proudly admit their heritage again. They genuinely love him and there will not be a regime change until Putin dies, and with most of the Russians clamoring for a stronger battlefield showing, at that time it's likely that the real dogs will be released. Russia could probably be defeated if NATO opened up the bag of total war. But that means European, Canadian, and American soldiers being killed in the numbers we haven't seen in almost eighty years, and that's assuming that the conflict didn't escalate into a nuclear exchange, which would be a genuine possibility.
    6
  128.  @oneviwatara9384  China is not defined by the PRC, the ROC or the Qing Dynasty. China is bigger than all of that, and it includes all of that, including all of the Mainland and all of the islands, including Hainan and Taiwan. The overwhelming majority of Chinese people want all of China to be united into a single state. The majority of Chinese people in Taiwan (which is everyone in Taiwan) would prefer to extend the status quo out as long as possible.
    6
  129.  @vortex1908  Bit of a one-trick pony, aren't you?
    6
  130. Mearsheimer sees China as the greater threat because they are the more powerful country. He advocates cozying up to Russia for the same reason Nixon and Kissinger cozied up to China. I'm not going to say categorically that he's not racist, because I don't know, but his analysis does not require racism. If Russia was the more powerful country he would advocate for a tighter relationship with China against Russia. My difference with Mearsheimer is his belief that the two largest countries could never get along well enough to cooperate for the greater benefit of humanity. I recognize his realist views, but I'm much more optimistic about our options. I hold out the possibility that we can avoid the Thucydides Trap.
    6
  131.  @golagiswatchingyou2966  I don't know that China is that interested in population growth. I certainly don't see them rolling back women's rights to achieve it. The problem regarding the water supplies is too much of a population already in place. I think China may come at India with the logic that "We were responsible enough to control our population, come back when you've done the same."
    6
  132.  @ihl0700677525  He's talking about Metternich's Concert of Europe codified at the Congress of Vienna which was established after the Napoleonic Wars and which balanced the strengths of Britain, France, Austria, Prussia and Russia. The idea was that if one power became dominate the other four would unite to keep them in check.
    6
  133.  @ihl0700677525  You've given a long and well thought-out response and I'm afraid I'm not going to return the favor. This is not because you don't deserve a response, but rather because I'm worn out on this conversation. While I continue to disagree with you, I compliment you on your efforts, and your intellectual stamina. Best regards, Alan
    6
  134. I think China can handle it.
    6
  135. I don't think it's all that rare. Most foreigners that live in China are honest and supportive and more and more of them are reaching out to the Youniverse all the time.
    6
  136. @KHAN SPENCER You do know that this has already happened, right?
    6
  137. Taiwan said it's a sovereign nation? Those are, very literally, fighting words.
    6
  138.  @tinafoster8665  The United States should not try to be like China, the United States needs to be itself. Some tips we could take from China might be to double down on investment on ourselves from technology to social harmony (general welfare, relative equality and civil rights). We should probably try to reign in the political power of firms and interest groups so that at least they would be responding to government initiatives rather than the reverse. But we should stay true to our distinctly American character regarding our democratic principles of government and especially our judicial independence and supremacy. That being said, neither should China try to be like the United States. Both countries, despite a few issues here and there, are phenomenally successful. We should both pursue excellence in the way that best serves our people and we should engage in friendly competition between us economically, perhaps militarily, but definitely technologically. That benefits everybody in the long run.
    6
  139. "What does that tell you?" That we need to get used to Trump because millennials are self-destructive purists.
    6
  140.  @nathanielalaburgDelhi  One would hope so.
    6
  141. Setting aside the fact that Tiananmen Square was three decades ago and that China has evolved quite a bit since then; China's restraint during the whole Hong Kong year of unrest has been remarkable up to this point. I would have predicted a brutal crackdown nine months ago, and that would be in any country. As for the erosion of Hong Kong autonomy, it's pretty obvious these vandals have brought it upon themselves.
    6
  142.  Gen Info  Simmer down. Hong Kong is experiencing an identity crisis, but Hong Kong is undeniably China and in the long run its residents will be fine Chinese citizens. What's going on now is uncomfortable for everyone, but it will pass. The confused and spoiled children who make up the bulk of the marchers will grow up and contribute to society. There's no need to defame them now and jeopardize their futures.
    6
  143.  @panzerofthelake506  If "All of China's Neighbors… unite[d] with nato for an anti Chinese alliance." Then China would be more likely to cut the water supply off to disrupt the alliance.
    6
  144. Yes, the reality is that many people trying to take care of families end up in these jobs. And whether they are taking care of others or not, they're still working their tails off. Munimum wage should be a living wage and if you're business can't afford it, then you shouldn't be in business.
    6
  145. With the exceptions of Japan and Australia, nobody in the region wants to have to choose sides between the United States and China. Siding with the loser in this conflict will have grave consequences, and maybe siding with the winner could as well in the short term. The other country that might actively take a side is Russia, but that probably would not be to the benefit of the United States.
    6
  146.  Frederic Bastiat  You do realize that California has a lot more of every kind of person than Mississippi I hope. Much larger population pool: 37,253,956 vs. 2,967,297
    6
  147. Underestimation of an enemy has never led to an unexpected defeat.
    6
  148.  Jack Shite  Three daughters, two wives (one is an ex), physically nauseated by the thought of intimate contact with another man. So far I think Buttigieg is the best candidate I've seen and I would vote for him in a minute. If he's still in the running during my state's primary, assuming he doesn't do something that really pisses me off, he'll get my vote then. And while it's possible that Pete Buttigieg "has no idea how normal men think…", it's not because he's gay, it's because he's abnormally intelligent and freakishly accomplished for someone his age.
    6
  149. And if he didn't reach for his wallet like he was told he'd have been resisting - it's win/win.
    5
  150.  Doglover extrem  The USA can only count on NATO if Russia is the aggressor. If Russia is attacked by the United States, than NATO is not obligated to support U.S. forces. You may be right about the far east. Bringing over and supplying American forces by sea may be easier than bringing in Russian forces and supplying them through Siberia. At some point westward that balance reverses though. If the goal of the United States is to take and hold a chunk of Eastern Siberia then that may be achievable in the short and medium terms.
    5
  151. A lot of what you say is correct. A lot of it is anti-Chinese propaganda. China has through most of history been the hegemon of the east Asian civilization and they're not going to be comfortable with their position in the world until that position is solidly re-established. As uncomfortable as many in the west and elsewhere might be with that reality it probably is where China truly belongs. Whether China's hegemonic ambitions extend beyond east Asia is not yet certain, though they are certainly seeking influence in central and south Asia as well as east Africa. These are areas of the world that the United States has largely ignored so it may just be a matter of picking up the scraps or, maybe, at some point they're going to challenge the U.S. for global hegemony. The more the west attempts to thwart Chinese ambitions though the more likely China will see the west as something that has to go. Doesn't necessarily mean there shouldn't be any pushback, just that pushback may have long-term consequences, as might non-interference. The potential consequences of any actions or non-actions need to be considered at the time.
    5
  152. As someone who just sold my house to pay off my and my his daughters' student loans, I'd love to see student loan forgiveness. The idea that because I had it tough everybody should have it tough is the kind of logic that keeps us wallowing in misery generation after generation. This is the difference between progressive and regressive thinking.
    5
  153. It's an answer for balancing out the state houses—the folks who draw the district lines.
    5
  154. I'm beginning to wonder if he understands what an A+ indicates.
    5
  155.  @AnabelleLee100  "No. Taiwan independence is older than Chinese Communist party." That is factually incorrect. Taiwan has been part of either China or Japan since 1863 when it was acquired by the Qing Dynasty. The last time Taiwan was independent was prior to that year. It has been de facto independent from the People's Republic of China since the PRC's inception in 1949 but has been part of the Republic of China since 1945 when it was returned to China after the defeat of Japan. It has been part of China all that time. The Communist Party of China of course was founded in 1921.
    5
  156. Mao will always be held in high regard because he is the founder of the People's Republic. He wasn't a good head of state though. He was paranoid and consequently destructive. His "errors" led to one of the greatest tragedies in human history. The one thing he did accomplish, not because he was great but because he was terrible, is that he burnt the forest making way for the growth of new saplings. Fortunately for China the next leader was truly exceptional. Deng was probably the greatest country leader of the twentieth century and he's in the running for the greatest leader in Chinese history. Xi may be the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao, but he's nowhere near as influential as Deng, and, I say this respectfully, he never will be. Whether China could become the success that it has in the time between 1945 and now without Mao is something we'll never know. But it could never be the success that it is without someone very much like Deng.
    5
  157.  Frederic Bastiat  What the customers like is obviously more important than what the workers need, right?
    5
  158.  @bonehand87  Napoleon recognized the military potential of a country that had the strongest economy of the day and whose population and potential conscription dwarfed that of any other state. China at the time was moribund because of its inward looking philosophy and because of its arrogant view of the world. For this, China would pay a steep price. But had China had better leadership over the next century she would have been unstoppable. This Napoleon recognized. As for math skills, I know you were just trying to emphasize a point but percentages of a concept over a hundred are just bad math.
    5
  159. All vaccines out there are going to be needed, and all of these vaccines are safe. Nobody should be undermining any of them. We're all in this together.
    5
  160. Dictatorships aren't necessarily more effective, but governments that are trusted by their people because they prioritize the well-being of their people are.
    5
  161.  @camphi1  Yeah, I can't see anyone challenging China in China. I wonder how many of these demonstrators really understand the power dynamics of the players that they're playing with.
    5
  162. There is no way to make this even for men and women. A woman should definitely have the right to choose whether or not to have an abortion but once the choice has been made to carry the pregnancy through then the needs of the child have to be taken into consideration more so than what's being suggested here. A child needs all three parents: the mother, the father and the state. When one of the parents abrogates their responsibility everybody else suffers for it including the other parents and especially the child. In America we pretty much have a borderline deadbeat state so there isn't a lot of room for additional parental abrogation. A child has a right to his/her parents and to the benefits of their parents' responsible nurturing behavior and neither parent should have the right to opt out of those responsibilities regardless of whether or not they regret their decisions in the morning.
    5
  163.    If Ukraine comes anywhere close to NATO membership, Russia will take it over before it gets the chance. That's why Russia destabilized Ukraine in the first place—they were getting too close to NATO/EU.
    5
  164.  @zilun  It was multiple dynasties. In some cases it was occupying dynasties. But it was always China. In the eyes of the Chinese people your definition of a country doesn't matter. In the eyes of the Chinese people Taiwan is part of China. That's not going to change. And in the end, the will of the Chinese people as exercised by the government of the People's Republic will bring Taiwan under state control, through military means if necessary. That will be the case regardless of what I want, what you want, or even what the inhabitants of Taiwan want. And the rest of the world will wring their hands and pontificate in righteous chastisement as they watch the inevitable play itself out.
    5
  165.  @zilun  China has had cycles of order and chaos throughout its history. While the extant of China has changed over time, almost always expanding, the frequency of consolidation was not rare. And even when China was broken up amongst different warlords, the expectation that the country was to be reunited by the strongest one was universal among the Chinese.
    5
  166.  @zilun  You will lose.
    5
  167. Perhaps they're hoping that after Putin dies Russia will have another Yeltsin in office.
    5
  168. Traditionally the term "terrorist" is applied to fighters who do not belong to a recognized state military, especially if they fight for an organization that the speaker disagrees with. Otherwise they can be referred to as rebels, insurgents, or even freedom fighters. It is a pejorative term (terrorist) and it clearly indicates a negative bias. Generally military soldiers are not considered terrorists even if they are doing a lot of killing, and even if they are doing it in a horrible fashion. When soldiers are referred to as terrorists, this is generally done to undermine the credibility of the state they fight for, more so than to condemn the actions of the soldiers. The NYT as well as pretty much all other keystone Western news media outlets have always had a pro-Israel bias that matches the pro-Israel biases in government, business, high society, Judaeo-Christian religion, and all power brokering institutions in the west. I think this largely stems, at least for non-Jews, from collective guilt over the Jewish experience in World War Two. This is coupled with a fear among Jews that criticism towards anything associated with them might well lead to persecution and possibly even attempts at extermination. Looking back historically, one can understand their trepidation. The Holocaust was merely the last in a millennium-long series of such fatally-driven pogroms. That being said, I think this unconditionally supportive view of Israel is changing as the new generations of Americans, Israelis, and other Westerners (outside of Germany, they made their bed and they're going to have to sleep in it for a very long time) are viewing Israeli behavior through fresh eyes and are able to see that behavior for what it is. Assuming these new generations don't get corrupted, Israel's going to find itself much less supported over the course of the next few decades, both form within and form outside.
    5
  169. If a war takes place China will consider the waters around Taiwan as part of China. American naval power may be such that it isn't attacked, but China will feel justified in attacking ships supplying Taiwan or ships defending blockade runners, especially within "their" waters. I think that the likelihood of involvement of the United States might be higher in the case of Taiwan than in the case of Ukraine for this reason. NATO can supply Ukraine because it shares a border with Ukraine. In a battle for Taiwan, China will consider itself to be completely surrounding Taiwan. In order to supply Taiwan ships will have to go through China, or at least what China sees as China. The United States will probably try to declare some or all of the waters around the island to be not Chinese, so if the US Navy insists on protecting the supply lines into Taiwan then there will probably be a perceived territorial incursion.
    5
  170. Jeffrey Hsu, that's a really good point. I wish I'd have thought of that.
    5
  171.  @realinfo6017  I don't know if I'd go so far as to call them a terrorist country, but assassinating civilian scientists is clearly an act of terror
    5
  172. same same
    5
  173.  @errormatrix4159  Russia has always had a certain degree of tepidness in its relations with China. Putin (whatever you think of him, he's an excellent judge of power and personality) doesn't trust anyone, and China is a powerful neighbor with whom it is important to have a relationship with that is neither too cozy nor too cold. Russia under Putin will give up nothing, but China, under Xi, is fully aware of that, and frankly, they have other issues that they recognize as having higher priority than any territorial claims that could antagonize Russia. Russia does not want China to be an overpowering neighbor, but neither does it want the United States to be able to work its will globally. Right now Russia is closer to China, both in interests and in philosophy, then it is with the West, and particularly with the United States. China is much more appreciative of Russia's position, and of Russia's needs than the West has proven to be. While Russia is probably not a reliable ally of China, they certainly cannot be counted on to work against them.
    5
  174. It wasn't much of a city prior to the British Concession. It was just an island in the Pearl River delta.
    5
  175.  @kingofchebureki3448  Perhaps. It would definitely be a completely different kind of conflict than an attack limited to Singapore. China's enemies would have more resources, but the Chinese army would have direct access to the battlefield and the difficulties of strictly maritime air operations would be somewhat mitigated.
    5
  176.  @ihl0700677525  I'm not sure we think as differently as our little debate indicated. In fact, part of the reason I ducked out was because I felt like I was being forced to double down on arguments I wasn't totally on board with. I also don't like crap-talking my own country, something that I thought was spiraling out of control.
    5
  177.  @americanpatriot126  Slow down, you're going to choke on that koolaid.
    5
  178. Kevin Rudd's description of the Chinese economic motivators is only partially correct in my opinion. In the spirit of tortured analogies I'd suggest that the whole economy is a bit like an American football team where the private sector is the offensive squad and the public sector is the defense. While growth from private sector is certainly the main contributor towards economic prosperity in China, public sector institutions and enterprises have provided the economy's protections during the 1997 and 2008 economic crises as well as the current pandemic response. China's got a strong balanced team which makes and keeps them competitive, even in a really high-powered division. So while the private sector may be largely responsible for the high score, it's important to remember that offense wins games but defense wins championships.
    5
  179. East Asia has had its share of conflicts, but it also has an unparalleled history of accomplishment. The world is falling back into place.
    5
  180. I think it unlikely that Russia will accept the offer. Russia doesn't want to see any expansion. So long as it's just Russia vs. Ukraine it stays limited and winnable. And while I'm sure they would appreciate the additional manpower, they don't want to tempt other countries to come in on the other side. However, if some other country does send troops to Ukraine, that would change the equation.
    5
  181.  @free_shortvideo  It certainly seems to be a highly puncuated translation of what sounds behind it to be a very smoothly delivered speech. I'm not sure what the point of that is. It could be that the translator is trying to emphasize Putin's points, or maybe to caricature him, to make him sound more like a demagogue. I wonder if it's intentional.
    5
  182. It also has the advantage of being a visa-free zone for most advanced countries. This makes it easier to do business with Hong Kong. Hopefully at some point China will have that policy as well.
    5
  183. I've seen a good interview on Deutsche Welle but the reporting there is pretty biased. The source I've found most trustworthy is CNA out of Singapore.
    5
  184.  @dallascopp4798  Your logic is ridiculous. China's 99.965% conviction rate means that, because it's extremely unlikely that 99.965% of those brought to trial are indeed guilty, that you cannot assume guilt based on whether or not someone has been convicted. It does not mean that you can assume innocence.
    5
  185. At this point her job is to refuse to capitulate to the demands of the demonstrators. Everything else is secondary.
    5
  186.  @Dies1r4e  China is just like every other country. They'll attack another country if they believe it is in their best interest. Most of the time attacking another country has greater costs than benefits. China is pretty rational in its policies. I think Singapore is pretty safe.
    5
  187. Class isn't really about how much money you make or where you live. It's about what you do. So a working class electrician can make more than his middle class manager. White collar jobs are middle class by definition whether or not they get paid well (assuming that they aren't engaging in a working class side hustle). There are a few professions where it gets a little murky. Nurses and teachers kind of straddle the line between working class and middle class. Curiously, both professions have traditionally been dominated by women, and perhaps that has something to do with it. As for your comment that we are all getting screwed together, I concur. The demonization of working class life has led to the undermining of working class protections and benefits which lowers the expectations and demands of middle class workers as well. The beneficiaries of this have been the investor class—the underclass have always been screwed.
    5
  188.  @letsworkforworldpeace7238  Your moniker is "let's work for World Peace", yet you advocate killing a country of 1.4 billion people. What a remarkable disconnect.
    5
  189. Title should say "The EU has agreed to sanction China for alleged human rights abuses against the Uighurs". No credible evidence of systemic abuse exists that I'm aware of. And unless someone is either in the Chinese government or has access to confidential information, there is no chance that they have seen credible evidence either.
    5
  190. China does this for multiple reasons, one of which you described.
    5
  191.  @lolollolol1436  Yeah, I think that China has done the cost benefit analyses and made rational decisions based on those. They're willing to defend themselves to a point, but eventually they realize that it's not really worth the effort.
    5
  192. I'm not sure we've ever been good at diplomacy. We've had moments (Nixon in China for instance), but we always seem to let our ideology get in the way.
    5
  193.  @peachychoc7905  Mercouris is very thorough, very intelligent, and very well-spoken. He's not unbiased though. He definitely should be listened too. But he's grown very frustrated with the West, with the U.S. and U.K. in particular, and it carries over in the angle of his commentary. I think he's very competent and he's a good counter to the standard pro-western/anti Russia-anti China perspective that dominates English language analysis, but he does have a bias and it does carry through.
    5
  194. Disappointed that Hitchhiker's Guide didn't make the list. Loved the books and the movie, still really peeved that they didn't finish the series. I'd also like to throw in a vote for Ice Pirates.
    4
  195. It's not moronic at all. There are many ways in which the two types of walls are comparable. Both are blunt instruments for dealing with a highly nuanced issue, both are born out of fear, both tragically separate families, both make the builders look weak and stupid, both are expensive, both are pathetic,… the list goes on and on.
    4
  196. When I first ran into Hangul I was amazed by its logic, its simplicity, and its neatness. Once the stroke rules were understood it became very easy to draw the characters. It may be more difficult to draw then a Latin cursive script, but who uses a Latin cursive script these days? My daughters' generation can barely read a cursive script because they almost never see it. The order of letters in the Latin alphabet appears to be pretty arbitrary and suggests to me that it would be harder to memorize than the orderly Hangul which is made up almost entirely of straight lines (the niung character being the exception which is written as a counterclockwise circle). The names of the letters better express the sounds they make. So despite the protestations of the Latin lovers above I would definitely consider Hangul to be the better alphabet. The biggest problem with Hangul is the same problem with any alphabetic system in that it's only readable in the language of the writer. If something is written in English using Hangul than a monolingual Korean won't be able to read it. The same is true if it's written in Cyrillic or Latin or Cherokee. A better system for inter-language dissemination would be a pictographic language like Chinese which can be read by anyone familiar with the writing system regardless of their spoken language. This has proven effective at keeping all the various native language (dialect) speakers in China united in their civilization for over two thousand years. Of course the problem with pictographic languages is that learning it is a full-time profession and most people don't want to spend the effort to do that. On a largely unrelated note Chinese is a much more beautiful script than either Hangul or Latin. It's only real competition in this regard is Arabic. Both Chinese and Arabic are uneasy on the ear so I guess they are compensating by making them easy on the eye. The most beautiful languages to hear, in my opinion, are French and Japanese, two languages that abuse the hell out of their written systems.
    4
  197. Creative-Name, as a white American of exclusively northern European stock I believe that the Chinese system is a better written system than Latin and the reason why is that learning to read Chinese does not require that you learn to speak Chinese. In the west nobody thinks of learning to read another language without learning to speak it because in an alphabetic language there's no way to do this. But in China there are, and for millennia have been, many distinct spoken languages (undersold as dialects), whose literate managerial classes could understand each other. This probably plays a large part in China's long history as a successful civilization-state. And while it maybe more difficult to learn another writing system, I don't think it's more difficult than learning another spoken language.
    4
  198.  Doglover extrem  I think extremely hostile terrain, and lots of it, along with the top air defense system in the world, durable weapons systems (compared to NATO models) that are easier to replace. The U.S. might steamroll Russia. But I wouldn't bet money on it if the conflict took place in Russia. Now, on neutral ground, absolutely the United States would win. But why on Earth would Russia fight the United States on neutral ground?
    4
  199. China would and probably will fight to reunify. It's more important to them than economic trade. When they are confident that they can achieve it regardless of who tries to stand in their way, they will make their move.
    4
  200. Trump has that effect on people.
    4
  201. I don't think you're going to see Korea jumping on board.
    4
  202. This is a miopic viewpoint. It's not Russia and China that will be increasingly isolated. The only way you can make that argument is to write off the non-Western world, which is increasingly siding with Russia and China in international fora. Western voices are important, but they don't constitute the numbers necessary to isolate anyone globally.
    4
  203.  @billkrebaum  How for back are you going because it's been part of China since 1683, considerably longer than Hawaii has been part of America.
    4
  204. Good luck getting the Republican party to go along with that.
    4
  205.  @NangongReng1973  The Chinese were very lucky to have Deng. He was an exceptional leader, rehabilitated twice so it's amazing he was in a position to do what he did. Deng was lucky that after Mao the Chinese people were willing to follow his leadership so completely.
    4
  206. This is some seriously messed up crap.
    4
  207. It's telling that South Korea is not part of this semi-alliance. Confidence that the future in the region can be in opposition to China is waning. East Asian countries don't want to have to choose, and most of them are not going to.
    4
  208.  @vortex1908  Your grip on reality is a little weak.
    4
  209. Atmost11 thank you (and I mean this sincerely) for not being an idiot. Your voting record suggests you're not a millennial, but whether you are a millenial or not you definitely deserve credit for voting in the country's best interest even if you have been underwhelmed by the results. Despite the frightening trend among not just millenials but all sorts of folks who are dissatisfied with Democratic politicians, many did put their emotions aside to make a sober assessment and vote in such a way as not to screw over the country and those folks, like yourself, should be recognized for their ability to think with their head. Once again, Thank You. And by all means, keep supporting the primary candidates that you believe in.
    4
  210. @Cancelled Peanut Australia is, if anything, more complicit than the states in anti-Chinese rhetoric and policy.
    4
  211. Their utility in war is something that can be debated, but they are very valuable during peacetime for securing and defending trade routes.
    4
  212. The Chinese will not attack unless they are confident they can win. Right now that is not the case. Eventually the Taiwan issue will have to be resolved because the Chinese are not giving up their claim on it. If the United States draws first blood, and in Binkov's scenario above that would almost certainly be the case, the world might not side with the United States regarding sanctions and such.
    4
  213. War made Russia a great power in 1812 and a superpower in 1945. What would it bring now? Destruction maybe, or prestige.
    4
  214. She's a lumberjack and she's okay…
    4
  215.  @AnnaKaunitz  "Tribes in Norway and Finland?? There no tribes in these countries" Tell that to the Sámi.
    4
  216. Finnish and Hungarian linguistic roots probably trace to Attila's western Huns.
    4
  217.  @aniksamiurrahman6365  What he's saying is that the enemy has a vote too.
    4
  218.  stephen glover  Because people like you are unfairly maligning them. The WHO is trying to help the world with defeat this menace and they are not in any way in the pocket of China. Absolutely you are pushing a conspiracy theory.
    4
  219.  @Theoryofcatsndogs  I haven't been to either location so I can only go on what I've heard. From what I understand of Tibet, China is investing substantially in the autonomous region. That has led to the improvement and modernization of the lives of of most Tibetans. That, of course, means that some of the folks invested in the past are unhappy, this includes most of the exile community in India whose families were the beneficiaries of the old medieval theocratic system. There are some instances of friction as many Chinese of non-Tibetan ethnicity have migrated into the region in search of economic opportunities. Though most fold up shop within a few years and leave, many have made lives for themselves in the region, and there are concerns of the loss of influence of the ethnically Tibetan Chinese within their own autonomous region. In an effort to fight inequality along ethnic lines the central government has initiated a slough of affirmative action programs, most notably policies favoring Tibetan students on university entrance exams and those supporting ethnic Tibetan entrepreneurs. I know that several years ago there were a couple cases of monks self-immolating in protest. I have to admit that I'm not sure exactly what they were protesting, and I don't want to be overly dismissive of their concerns, but I cannot ignore the fact that they represented what had been the ruling class prior to 1959 and who are no-longer allowed to enslave the populace. My understanding about Xinjiang is that it is an autonomous province with a heavy police presence largely due to a surge in domestic terrorism in the early years of this century. General chaos and religious fundamentalism in the countries to Xinjiang's west were imported into the region by jihadists whose strategy was, in part, to promote a Uighur separatist state called East Turkistan which would be based on Shari'a law and ethnic purity which cost the lives of many moderate Muslims including at least one Uighur Imam. This situation was then exascerbated by an incident in eastern China where a rumor was started that some Uighur men raped a co-worker, which resulted in a murderous attack on over a hundred Uighurs in Shaoguan. News of this event then triggered a riot in Urumqi in which UIghurs attacked Han Chinese. The Chinese government executed the man who started the original rumor, which, though I understand, I don't approve of being that I'm an opponent of the death penalty. With the province spiraling into violence, the government embarked on campaign to reduce fundamentalism and separatism in the region. At this point, multiple narratives emerge. The police presence increased substantially. Educational material in Xinjiang's schools were reviewed for separatist ideology and symbolism and several administrators that had been responsible for promoting separatist doctrine in Xinjiang's textbooks were convicted of treason and jailed. Xinjiang's citizens were surveilled for interest in fundamentalist or separatist information, and those caught were taken into reeducation camps. I'm sure many of them were largely innocent—they just looked at the wrong website. China admits that these reeducation centers existed. China says that the purpose of the centers was two-fold. The first goal was to inform the detainees of the dangers of fundamentalism and separatism, the degree to which their country disapproved of such things, how much their country cares for them, and how important it is for them to be good Chinese citizens, so, what you might charitably call patriotic brainwashing. The second goal was to provide vocational education and certification so that the graduates of the program could have happy and productive lives within the broader Chinese system. Now the critics of these systems claim that up to a million Uighurs out of a population of 12 million have been brought into this system. They claim that people have been tortured and killed in these programs and that they've been used as slave labor. The Chinese claim that everybody who went through this system has completed the program and that they have been released and allowed to move on with their lives. While the accusations of systemic abuses are unsubstantiated and highly suspect, I certainly don't doubt that there were instances of abuse. The same is true of any system of detention pretty much everywhere, but of course that doesn't excuse it. The questions I have for the government regarding the program are "Why don't I see more profiles of people who have supposedly successfully completed the program?", and "Surely there are some people who failed to give up on their old views, what happened to them?" I haven't seen answers that satisfy me on these questions and I do fault the Chinese on the breadth of their dragnet. Though I don't believe they came anywhere close to a million people detained, I'm pretty sure they detained more than what was appropriate. Even with my misgivings though, I still think that brainwashing jihadists into patriotic citizens over a year or two and teaching them a trade is much better than locking them up for decades at a time, like the dumb kid we framed in Portland to try to blow up Pioneer Square. And while these reeducation camps have legitimate human rights complaints, as near as I can tell, they're not concentration camps—they're damn sure not death camps. They seem to be much less damaging to those inside than, say, American prison, and they in no way make China comparable to Nazi Germany.
    4
  220.  @zilun  Taiwan didn't see the combat on the island itself, but when your country's at war, you're involved.
    4
  221. Charity has two pernicious characteristics: it gives people who take more than their fair share a way to look good and feel good about themselves despite the harm they do, and it gives governments an excuse to fall short of what should be their responsibilities to solve these problems.
    4
  222. I think your characterization of China is unfair. China only clamped down on information before they knew what they were dealing with and they were trying to avoid the kind of panic that would have sent everyone in Wuhan fleeing to other parts of the country, like what happened in Italy. Ninety-nine times out of a hundred that's the right move. This time it may or may not have been. We'll never know if telling the people of Wuhan of the presence of a possible epidemic would have resulted in fewer or more cases. Once the authorities were sure of the situation they took pretty aggressive measures to lock it down which almost certainly saved many lives. Also, the mobilization of resources to build facilities and equipment in short order was remarkable and that too saved many lives.
    4
  223.  @Tekisasubakani  BUsiness are concerned about short-term profits. China takes advantage of it.
    4
  224.  @syedsajid630  I think you mean "from" not "to".
    4
  225. This is getting stupider and stupider and the whole world is going to suffer for it. China will not in our lifetime kowtow to the United States again. The United States has every right to negotiate a more equal and less nurturing arrangement now that China is no longer really a developing nation. China's gone along with the international rules and norms because, as a "developing nation" they were exploitable. If we are going to expect China to give up those advantages then we're going to have to negotiate new rules as well as conditions because the current rules were written when China was weak. China's not weak anymore.
    4
  226. "The Hidden Brane [sic]" is a great radio show. Picture two planes rotating about two independent (and probably also rotating) axes. Where the two planes intersect you have a line. If there is any substantiality to those planes there will be a little resistance at that line to the motion of those planes. Think of it as similar to the resistance of a net crossing a stream. As these planes move in space independently of each other they always intersect, and that line of intersection moves around all over the place. Let's call that line a little one-dimensional universe. I said the planes always intersect, but that's not true. On very rare occasions the planes line up parallel. Despite the fact that the little one-dimensional universe is infinite along its dimension, all of a sudden it ceases to exist. And in an infinitesimally small moment after that little universe puffs out of existence, in a different location, another infinite little universe immediately pops into existence. This new universe went from nothing to infinite in an instant. This new universe is very consistent in its resistance throughout its entire length; at least it is initially. However, over time, that resistance starts to coagulate into lumps of vibrating planer material. Those vibrating lumps exert slightly more resistance than the spaces between them and they start actually bending slightly the line of intersection creating little gravity wells. At some point the continuity is compromised and some of these vibrational lumps come in contact with each other and begin to form clumps. The larger the clumps get, the more resistance they exert against the flow of the rotating planes creating deeper and deeper wells that push more and more of these clumps towards each other. Some of these clumps may get so big that they cannot resist the flow and like water droplets on a pool of oil they eventually break the surface and are lost forever to the miasmic flow of the rotating planes. Now when those two planes whacked into each other after their moment of parallelism, that line of intersection became observable because the resistance between the two planes at that line created vibrations in that planer material. These vibrations were identical and ubiquitous along the whole definition of this universe. These vibrations would also slowly deteriorate over time as the planer material got more comfortable with the concept of intersection. It's kind of like how if you drop a section of hurricane fence flat-wise onto the surface of a pool you at first get a lot of tiny splashing as the water and the steel meet for the first time. As they get used to each other's presence though the fence continues on its way through the water, still resisted, but less so as it continues sink. These vibrations, ever-diminishing at a steady rate, clumping up into stuff, eventually form into little one-dimensional people. Those people, steadily getting smaller, start observing the infinite universe in which they exist. They see everything getting smaller at the same rate that they are which results in the distance between everything getting wider (nuclear and electro-magnetic forces keep objects tightly concentrated). It looks to them like everything in both directions is slowly pulling away from them. This perception is compounded by the fact that all their local measuring tools are getting smaller as well. a space that would have been measured as an inch a while ago, now measures a foot using the same ruler. Also light that would have been blue when it was emitted back then now appears red because the ruler measuring the unchanging wave length is smaller than it was when the light was emitted. Unable to imagine themselves and everything else shrinking, they just assumed that their universe was expanding, like marks on a rubber band being stretched. I hope you've all enjoyed my story of the little one-dimensional universe. Sometimes I wonder if it might work if I scaled it up two dimensions: you know, a three dimensional universe formed by the intersection of two four-dimensional branes rotating about moving axes within a five-dimensional whatever-you-call-a-five-dimensional-void-like-thing. Like so much speculation, I guess we'll never know.
    4
  227. Journalism everywhere is agenda driven. This is true of so called mainstream media as well is independent journalism. It's true in the west, and it's true in Russia and China and everywhere else as well. This doesn't mean that journalism should be ignored though. It's our only source of information for those of us outside the intelligence communities. We should listen, and we should be thankful for folks like Alexander who sift through it for us, but we should be very careful about what information we believe and how much we believe what we want to believe. We only have glimpses of the truth, and it's hard to distinguish from the true-sounding.
    4
  228. Considering that their country is China, that doesn't make any sense at all.
    4
  229.  @robbrown4621  And most of those stories are complete BS.
    4
  230. Yeah, expecting a young street reporter to know what an opaque government hundreds of miles away is going to do about the situation seems a little unreasonable.
    4
  231. So they put in a craft-beer provision at the request of Ron Wyden. He's not seriously thinking about voting for this is he?
    4
  232. I'll say it. Capitalism is completely inconsistent with the human right to housing. Capitalism is inconsistent with any human right in any field where maximization of profit results in need. My own solution would be strict government price control on floor space and heavy government prohibitions on access favoritism. Not only would this allow working people to live within the vicinity of the places they work, it would make the cost of doing business much more reasonable for those ground floor shops that are paying rent in those mixed-use buildings. Those shops could afford to hire more employees; they might be able to sell their goods at a more reasonable price allowing the standard of living to rise among their customers. So much of our economy is locked up in land whose value is largely arbitrary. And because so many Americans are at least a little bit invested in property, it's become a political third rail. And while it is true that if we controlled land and floorspace costs that investors would invest elsewhere, government should be able to build because it's in the peoples' interest. We should be doing that anyway because investors aren't willing to build family friendly high-density housing in America's downtowns, which we need.
    4
  233.  @Americansikkunt  Except that the whole concept of "Incel" is that you are hurt, that you're claiming that you're suffering because you're being treated like a pariah (or at least ignored) by desirable women. And while that can be very painful, it's also very normal (love bites), and it is not legitimate grounds for attacking women, individually or as a group, the way many incels do. Feminism is also born out of suffering. And while there is a perception, rightly or wrongly, that women who have a hard time attracting male attention gravitate towards feminism, you rarely see the hatefulness and the advocacy towards violence within feminist circles that you see in the incel movement. Also, for the most part feminism is a progressive empowerment movement based on ambition while the incel movement is very regressive and based on self-pity. While I wouldn't say that there are no instances of individual feminists taking it too far, it's more the exception than the rule. For these reasons I think equivalence is inappropriate.
    4
  234. Russia has valid reasons to despise the United States. In the 1990s we raped the Russian economy, backstabbed them diplomatically by supporting anti-Russian movements and parties within the countries who had traditionally been within their realm of influence, even going so far as to bring the Baltic countries into NATO and the EU after directly promising that we would not do that, and we demoralized the Russian people by arrogantly flaunting our "victory" over them on the world stage. And one man who definitely holds a grudge against the United States over this is none other than the president of Russia himself, Vlad the man, Putin.
    4
  235. Much of the persecution and repression is western propaganda sourced by individuals and organizations with a personal or ideological beef with China and spread uncritically by western media outlets. China is by no means perfect and they have done some dumb oppressive things like kidnapping book sellers in Hong Kong selling contraband books. But there is no solid evidence for Uighur genocide, slave labor in Xinjiang, or widespread repression in Hong Kong or anywhere else in China. Your comment about comparing economic growth between a country emerging from widespread poverty to a country that has not been there for a century and a half is a good argument. I would agree. However, China's accomplishment emerging from the third world at the rate that they have is still unprecedented in human history and it is worthy of our appreciation both for it's impressive scope and for its contribution to the betterment of mankind. China will not be able to maintain 6%-9% growth going forward and nobody expects them to. But right now it looks like the Chinese government is trying to take better care of its people than many western governments including that of the United States, and the vast majority of Chinese appreciate that and support their system and the government. The Chinese do not feel oppressed, and they don't have nearly as much anxiety in their lives as Americans do because they're not carrying a ton of personal debt and they know that their government has the flexibility to take care of problems without having to publicly debate every decision out of existence.
    4
  236. But would Xi Jinping be the kind of guy that you would want to drink a beer with?
    4
  237.  @the11382  Napoleon took advantage of the lack of a European coalition. Unity of opposition galvanized when he'd attacked enough territory to effect every other major kingdom in Europe. That and the fact that all these monarchies were terrified of the French Revolution that Napoleon was claiming to spread was the glue necessary to defeat the upstart empire. Germany's actions in the nineteenth century were intentionally limited so as not to invoke the Congressional Coalition. By the end of the nineteenth century the Congress of Europe had broken down into two alliance blocks. If you defined the end of the Congress of Europe to coincide with Bismark's establishment of the Three Emperor's League, it still lasted about half a century.
    4
  238.  @joy-115  He'd be awfully good on the second slot under Bernie to help give independents a reason to vote Democratic.
    4
  239.  @andrewdicken2561  They're rebuilding Africa, helping the people move towards prosperity in the twenty-first century.
    4
  240. "Academic, Adrien Zenz"—good one. What are my thoughts, you ask? I think you're a lot more likely to have incidences of compulsive labor in Vietnam and Bangladesh, the two countries you listed as alternatives, than in any part of China, including Xinjiang.
    4
  241. We didn't have to have foes. We forced them, and are still forcing them, to stand up against us.
    4
  242. ​ @bngr_bngr  I'm always skeptical that demonstrators accurately represent "the people", but they always represent some people. I know there are Iraqis that don't approve of too much Iranian influence, but I wonder how that compares to how many don't approve of American influence. I don't know the nature of the contractors that were hit nor do I know who they were hit by. I know the American embassy was not breached. Assuming that all of this was ordered by Iran, which I think is a hugely irresponsible assumption, I still think taking out this general is a crazy escalation. If we wanted to maintain any goodwill in either Iraq or Iran, this was a terrible move.
    4
  243. That helicopter is great and I'm glad to see it got off the ground. Mars' atmosphere is so thin I had strong doubts about its ability to do so. It will work better in thicker atmospheres. On Mars it can probably barely lift itself even when constructed of the lightest materials. Nevertheless, that could still have some utility.
    4
  244. That's not the Second Korean War, that's World War Three.
    4
  245.  @tinafoster8665  That bridge was built fine, it just wasn't properly maintained. That's actually a big problem with overproduction of infrastructure. It takes resources to maintain roads, rails, bridges and the like. It's a long term commitment and if its built in boom times or with borrowed money it may very well fall apart when the piper comes for payment. Of course good infrastructure is crucial for a healthy economy so I'm not advocating under-investment in infrastructure. It's just complicated is all.
    4
  246.  @k.t.5405  China is centrally authoritarian—It's not totalitarian. And the system of government isn't what's important. What matters is if the government takes care of its people, regardless of system.
    4
  247. Transit would be a limiting factor. Pipelines and rail connections are being built but for the immediate future it wouldn't completely make up for loss of shipping.
    4
  248.  Gen Info  American here. In the United States we grow up following a doctrine that is worshipful of democracy and, to a slightly lesser extant, liberal economics. Despite our political differences, some of which are quite profound, it's rare to find an American who doesn't believe in the fundamental supremacy of these two concepts. We're told from the beginning that non-democratic governments are inherently oppressive and therefore hated by the people that live under them. Most Americans think that anyone suggesting otherwise is either being forced to say something they don't believe, or is corrupted and speciously defending a system that benefits them at the expense of normal people. Americans also believe that people would rather have freedom and voting privileges than food, decent health services or secure streets. We're not hypocritical in this; most of us genuinely believe this. And we don't understand it when someone else doesn't. We've done some bad things internationally (I'm not going to get into our domestic shortcomings here), but for what it's worth, we've always tried, at least since World War II, to do good. We're deep-rooted idealists. We believe our system is the best for everyone and we want everyone to enjoy the benefits of it. Unlike the British imperialists before us, we believe that no one is ethnically or culturally incompatible with our type of system. In that one respect, we're enlightened. We have within our country, people from all over the world and they all have proven themselves worthy of participating in our democracy as American citizens. Personally, I think we're a little stuck on ourselves. Our system is pretty good for us, and anyone who wants to be part of America and participate should be welcome. But our view of democracy borders on religious and unwillingness to accept other options which may be working for other countries and other people is harmful, especially considering that we're willing to foment chaos and break up countries in the hope that out of the wreckage a democracy will emerge. It's not that we're fundamentally bad, but rather that our cost-benefit analysis abilities are badly corrupted by our idealism. I hope that over time we become more tolerant of governments that have elected to serve their people through a different mechanism, but I'm not holding my breath. Sorry about the novel, but I want you to understand that, misguided as we may be, we're not evil. And hopefully with a resurgent China that, unlike our former Soviet adversaries, isn't trying to religiously push their political ideology on the rest of the world, we can learn to tolerate and work together with other powerful empires, democratic or not, for a better and more stable and prosperous world for everyone.
    4
  249. We're going to punish China by treating Hong Kong like all other Chinese cities.
    4
  250.  @dr.lyleevans6915  Your words are marked. I see a different future. China is going to come out of this health crisis earlier and with less economic damage (and with a better reputation) than anyone else in their peer group. China's clout in Pakistan is strong and continues to be carefully cultivated and after America's treatment of Iran I don't see how you can even contemplate their cooperation. America's grip on East Asian loyalty in Korea and Japan is fairly strong but will wane over time as China increasingly dominates their trade and their trade routes to Europe. Loyalty from Taiwan will be absolute until China takes it back, probably in 2049. As for SE Asia, China's investments will make going against them difficult and the water situation means that they can never truly stand up against them. I don't see Russia siding overwhelmingly with the U.S., though the will probably vacillate over time. China has maritime disputes that will probably not go away, but as China's navy gains in strength, active opposition will probably decline. As for Trump, are you kidding me? He's done more damage to the international reputation of the United States than anyone in living memory. If his FP legacy ends up being that he pissed off everyone including the Chinese, I don't see how that helps America, especially in the long run. I can't wait til that moron is out of office and we can start to rebuild our foreign relations back to some semblance of what they ere and what they should be.
    4
  251. I do too. It sucks when we support someone for years and then choose to walk away when we no longer want to pay the price continue that support. I remember feeling that way when we dropped Mobutu Sese Seko after decades of support through the Cold War. I thought it made America look fickle and untrustworthy then, and I feel this does so as well now. As sad and despicable as it is to leave these people hanging, many of whom might very well die because of it, it was destined to happen at some point. And while I absolutely despise Trump and the vast majority of his decisions in no small part because of his complete lack of empathy for the victims of his whimsical decisions, I think it's the right move to rip the bandaid off of this one right now. Americans are not legitimate players in this theater. Nobody trusts us , for good reason. Turkey and Iran are the regional powers and they are the countries that need to come up with a long term solution on how to make this area peaceful and prosperous. None of the actors in the region are angels. After years of funneling terrorist fighters into Syria Turkey cannot have any faith that Syria would not do likewise in reverse with YPG Kurds. Turkey's impending occupation, much like Israel's in the Golan Heights, makes perfect sense from the Turkish point of view, even if it's a horrendous breach of Syrian sovereignty. The best result at this point is for an agreement between Turkey and Syria with the backing of Iran, but the Syrian Civil War first has to end completely. I hope there is as little bloodshed as possible. It's high time the location had some peace and stability. I'm sorry for our abandonment of the PKK and the people of the region but I'm even more sorry for establishing the illusion that a new state carved from Syria, Iraq and maybe parts of Turkey and Iran was ever a possibility, it never was. And while there is no honorable way to abandon that fantasy, there's no sensible justification for artificially continuing it.
    4
  252. The Russians aren't blocking Odessa. The Ukrainians have to clean up the mines that they laid in order for freighters to get in and out.
    4
  253. The thing about democratic countries is that what should be is determined by the people. If the majority want to sacrifice the vulnerable and those who care for them to maintain freedom of movement, they can do that. Likewise, if they want to shut down the economy and force everyone into lockdown to avoid casualties, they can do that too. They can also find something in the middle, balancing the desire for personal freedom against the existing threats that that freedom enables. Your opinion that freedom outweighs safety is valued, but in a democracy, only the majority opinion determines what should and shouldn't be.
    4
  254. He already has, but yeah, I hope we haven't heard the last of Pete Buttigieg at the national level.
    4
  255. I've always thought that China's gotten itself into an enviable position ideologically. As long as their state-guided capitalism satisfies the public they can ride with it. If it ever fails they can claim that that step in the process towards communism has run its course and it's time to move to the next step. Either way the party remains in control of government and the country avoids chaos.
    4
  256. His book, "On China", shows an understanding of the country rarely seen among western politicians and intellectuals.
    4
  257. They have "numbers" of unarmed protesters in a single city on the edge of the most populated country in the world with the world's second largest military. What's happening in Hong Kong makes for powerful imagery which the Chinese government is sensitive to. But I'd advise against confusing that with real power.
    4
  258. The verdict is very much still out on whether or not Russia is a paper tiger. Assertions that Russia is failing in Ukraine is every bit as much of a propaganda as Russian claims that everything is going as planned. Wars take time, and Russia's goals and intentions may or may not be what we proclaim to be. A year or two from now we'll have a better grasp on the totality of the situation one way or another. It's important for the United States to maintain a military that's sufficiently effective to back up the seriousness of American interests, this is not in and of itself, merely a slavish capitulation to the political power of the military industrial complex. We do have legitimate as well as questionable interests that need to be protected by more than words and promises. Also, in the absence of industrial strength, the capacity to research and produce military hardware has to be preserved somehow, because, as I mentioned earlier, wars take time. As for Chinese aggression, China will take Taiwan at some point, though it will most likely be at a time when they are confident that is not merely achievable, but assured. That timetable may be moved up if Taiwan actually declares independence. I think the current narrative on the Ukraine war is likely to be the template for coverage on a war of recovery on Taiwan, if the PLA doesn't take the island within a week the western media will be declaring a victory for the island's defenders. I seriously doubt Chine thinks they'll take it in a week though.
    4
  259. Russia is not going to attack Finland while it is focusing on Ukraine. Bismark's rule was to only go to war with one country at a time and I think Putin is aware of that. Control in Ukraine is more important right now than Finnish neutrality both for tactical and cultural reasons.
    4
  260.  @macwilko  But China has had internal inquiries and people that made poor decisions have been punished for it. China handling of this disease has been among the most effective in the world. If you account for the sheer amounts of unknowns involved at the beginning I would argue that they probably have managed it the best. China has been on the receiving end of immense criticism since the beginning when people in my country were criticizing and ridiculing them for overreacting as they built new hospitals and forced symptomatic people into hotel rooms and makeshift quarantine facilities. I think China at this point has rightfully determined that no matter how transparent they are, no matter how correct they were in their decision making, that they are going to be eviscerated on pretty much all western platforms. I don't think they see much point in transparency, because their image isn't based on actuality but rather on a preconception of culpability that mere facts won't shake. Many in China have taken the attitude, "Why play if I can't win?" Unfortunately it's kind of a self-fulfilling dilemma. The more unwarranted criticism China takes, the more China tells their critics where to shove it, and the more the critics amp up the criticism. There won't be transparency until both sides stop behaving like children.
    4
  261. Pretty rich of NASA to chastise someone else for allowing debris to burn up in the atmosphere.
    4
  262. This is Australian, not American—not that the Australians don't have issues.
    4
  263.  @awijaya2116  China has a reputation for taking good ideas and running with them. It's usually framed as "stealing" by their detractors.
    4
  264.  @Rampart.X  "Communism is Globalist." Not the version with Chinese characteristics.
    4
  265. I respectfully disagree. People who make large sums of money only provide jobs for people who move around large sums of money, usually to increase their resource absorption or to avoid taxation. Demand creates jobs. Some clever folks create goods or services that society finds desirable creating demand. The people who create these things should get rich. But if somebody would create something like this to become the next billionaire but won't create something like that if it only means he can be a millionaire then he's a greedy bastard, an idiot, and a detriment to society. You don't need to lock up insane amounts of money in a limited number of individuals to stimulate ingenuity and entrepreneurship. As for the money that some of these people distribute through philanthropy? I'm not impressed. That's exactly what government is for, to gather the community's resources and apply them according to the priorities of society, not the priorities of some rich guy. I agree that opportunity needs to be available to industrious, ambitious, intelligent, well-connected, lucky individuals to obtain more wealth than their less industrious, less ambitious, less intelligent, less connected, less lucky counterparts and it should be enough to make it a goal worth striving for but it doesn't need to be insane. And to the extant that a bum on the streets of New York has opportunity? Of course many "bums" could pull their lives together and move into normal society. But the opportunities he has to do this are provided in large part by social programs that assist with housing and job placement, not to mention the "streets" of New York that he walks are built and maintained through municipal socialism.
    4
  266. This thread is showcasing a few commentators who found themselves in a difficult situation, changed gears and succeeded in this economy. For those commentators That's fantastic for you. You deserve kudos for your resilience. However, your experience is not available to everybody. Not everyone has your talents, not everyone has your support and not everyone has your luck. And admittedly, not everyone has your drive, which I think that lack you are contemptuously projecting on to anyone struggling to succeed as you have. It's very easy to miss the mark repeatedly in this economy and it's also easy to get absorbed by your job and the personal problems in your life that even people with admirable ambition frequently never take off. The union organizers showcased here are at least gambling their energy on an ambition that may improve their lives and might even improve the lives of many others as well. Some people at the bottom are their because they are screw-ups. Some are at the bottom because their attempts to move forward have not succeeded, yet. Some of these folks have been beaten down to the point where they no longer have the energy to stand up. I'm glad you've succeeded. I wish you were less contemptuous of those less fortunate.
    3
  267. I'm 46
    3
  268. Not all propaganda is wrong or even wrong-headed and not everyone who disagrees with you is spewing propaganda.
    3
  269. The regional powers in that area always have been and will continue to be Anatolia, Persia and Egypt. Everyone else is a flash in the pan. How power and influence distribute themselves among Turkey, Iran and Egypt, and whether or not these polities can get past their ethnic, historical and sectarian differences will determine whether or not the region as a whole blossoms or withers.
    3
  270. For the record, we didn't establish a government in South Korea. And while we did write the Current Japanese constitution, a great deal of the functional government of Japan was carried over from the Imperial State.
    3
  271. The reason why the Latin alphabet and its variations dominated a large part of the world is because the Spanish, the Portuguese, the French, the Dutch and the English imposed it on a large part of the world and the reason the Latin alphabet and its variations dominated Spain, Portugal, France, the Netherlands and England is because the Romans imposed it on them.
    3
  272. "Like I said, in the class you are specifically told not to take your hands off the wheel. He should not have started reaching for ID at all" For argument's sake let's acknowledge your claim and disregard any other conflicting advice about complying with officer's instructions. He still should not have been killed.
    3
  273. Though I don't know, I think this may be part of the reason that China appears to have shelved their type 005 and type 006 developments. You could load a much smaller ship with drones and China is at the forefront of AI development.
    3
  274.  @jackchiu7560  His attitude hasn't changed. He came into Anchorage intending to knock China down a peg or two. The fact that China stood up to him didn't create his animosity, it just reinforced it.
    3
  275.  Doglover extrem  I don't think I agree with you.
    3
  276. What he's suggesting is that there used to be very little molecular oxygen in the atmosphere - that it was almost all tied up in carbon dioxide. When plant life took off it separated the CO2 into carbon-based plant fiber (later compressed into coal) and free oxygen. If we burn all the coal (along with oil and all living and remaining plant matter) the chemical reaction will pair up all the free oxygen in the atmosphere with those stored carbon atoms until the atmosphere returns to the state it was in prior to beginning of plant life which was far less oxygenated than any atmosphere we've seen since.
    3
  277.  @EEVictory13  That's two questions.
    3
  278.  @traderwilliam2  Communists aren't directly involved in this.
    3
  279. "Given their history of behavior, I think it is very likely that they will try to do force their imperialistic will onto everyone if they ever become the global power like US. It really could be the future of humanity that we will all be watched and scored based on what we buy on Amazon using our cellphones. People criticize US for meddling in foreign affairs, but believe me, US is by far the best gentleman world has ever seen. Nowhere in world history I've ever seen a world dominating power constraining itself this well." As an American I'm touched, I never realized I was so awesome. Judging the behavior of China in the future based on their past is highly suspect because in many ways modern China is very different from imperial China. Judging the behavior of China in the future based on humanity's past is probably a better bet. Powerful countries exert power based on their perceptions of their interests. That's the case with the United States today, as it was with Britain before us and Spain before them. Our greatest propaganda points during the Cold War centered on our personal freedoms versus those of Soviet citizens. But in America today, if the police ask to see your papers, you'd better produce something. And while it's nice to see that MagicSteel1 appreciates the magnanimity of American imperialism, I'm not sure our Latin American neighbors would agree. MagicSteel1's concerns are legitimate. However, his aggressive approach is unfair. China is many things, some good and some bad and while unlike the United States they have a few territorial issues outstanding and their government is more hands-on in the lives of its citizens, she's probably no more threatening than any other state of similar strength and influence.
    3
  280. In many ways India is a normal country and China is a rockstar. What China has accomplished hasn't been done by anyone, but China's accomplishments came at great cost. In the 1940s and 50s China eliminated the land-owning class by exiling them, imprisoning them, and in some cases killing them. This burning of the forest eventually led to a classless society with an extremely fertile environment in which the genius within the population was not held back by social restraints. The one-child policy shattered the old Confucian conceit of valuing sons over daughters. Families had to appreciate whatever child fate gave them, and because of this daughters became just as worthy of investment as sons. I'm not going to suggest that there is no corruption in China, but it does periodically get purged. Because of this the Chinese people trust their government and companies trust the regulatory environment. Also, the Chinese government takes a practical approach to taking care of problems without having to submit every change to a debate among the people or their representatives. China does well when it has good leaders. If China had bad leaders, the system could accentuate the worst aspects of those leaders by providing such an authoritarian platform. I hope India succeeds in the long run, but the problems listed in the clip, as well as issues in the relationships of its religious communities, are going to have to be dealt with. I'm not sure that I could advise India in good conscience to deal with those problems the way China did. Hopefully they'll find less painful methods, but that might mean that it takes a lot more time.
    3
  281. Of course America has the right to criticize other abusers. In fact we have a responsibility to because of our position in the world. Our criticism would be much more effective if our hypocrisy was not so blatant and we should definitely clean up our own house posthaste, but regardless we should absolutely call out human rights abuses where we find them in other countries and other countries should absolutely call us out in return. I agree with your second point as well. Of course politics plays into our diplomacy but our criticisms are lopsided and some of the countries we shield are more deserving of criticism than some of the countries we blast. I think you are right to point that out and I would suggest that you continue to do so.
    3
  282.  @joemikey278  I agree that much of the South China Sea should be outside of credible claims for China, however, the Chinese don't see it that way for two reasons. The first is that they've been able to acquire an ancient map that described those waters as Chinese. The Chinese position isn't so much that these were Chinese waters so much as that these waters were part of Imperial China and therefore are now part of modern China. This is a difference in cultural perspective that most non-Chinese dismiss. There is also the practical importance of these waters. Because so much of Chinese trade passes through these waters they want to be able to make sure they're not going to be blockaded there (The Japanese and Koreans could say the same, but balance of power and all). I suspect that in the end the Chinese are going to win this fight. But for the immediate future it's just going to be awkward and uncomfortable for everyone.
    3
  283.  @joemikey278  I think we're largely in agreement. My point about an attack on carriers is that if we weren't at war prior to the sinking of a carrier, we would be immediately thereafter. Military leadership in China is very hawkish indeed and part of the challenge of the Chinese premiership is keeping the generals on a leash while still maintaining their political support. I do think Premier Xi is up to the challenge on that one, though it is reasonable to be concerned about potential successors. Regardless of what the Chinese generals say or think, a full-blown military contest with the United States at this time would be a disaster for them. It probably would be no picnic for the United States either with heavy losses at sea and in the air. How and why it all started would play a big role in both domestic and international support for the U.S. operations. If a carrier were taken out just because it was patrolling the South China Sea then the U.S. population would almost certainly rally 'round the need to avenge the attack. If after a declaration of independence China began military operations to reincorporate Taiwan and the United States injected itself and then took casualties because of that then global and domestic support for the United States would be more tepid. I'd still put my money on the U.S. Navy as the ultimate victor for at least the next two decades either way. I wanted to say something about this part of your post: "Maybe Egypt should claim the entire Mediterranean sea, because they have ancient trade route maps. How about Norway/Vikings claiming the entire Baltic Sea. They were the first to establish sailing routes there! So, for most of the rest of the world, the South China Sea maritime claims along with East China Sea Maritime claims seem stupid silly and against modern international law!" The reason the South China Sea claims are not "stupid silly" is because unlike Egypt and Norway, in a couple of decades China's going to have the wherewithal to back up their claim practically. China cares a lot more about the territory than it does about international convention and because those rules were set up at a time of Chinese weakness the Chinese leaders will be quite comfortable dismissing them once they are powerful enough to do so, saying that their needs weren't considered at the time. They will have the support of the Chinese people and probably some others with non-conforming claims or a desire to ingratiate themselves with the Chinese. The East China Sea claims are actually more legitimate in the big picture, but not the way Beijing is painting it. The Daiyou islands were returned to China along with the rest of occupied China including Taiwan by the Allies after the defeat of the Japanese in 1945. Being that the PRC never took the islands during the Chinese Civil War the islands are still part of the Republic of China currently residing on Taiwan. If the PRC government were taking advice from me they would back the Taiwanese claim on the islands understanding that at some point most likely around 2049 they'd get them back anyway as Taiwan is reintegrated into the People's Republic one way or another. Of course they have no reason to listen to me so they don't.
    3
  284.  @michaelkatz275  If they are honest and informed then they'll agree with that description. The only real caveat is that it doesn't have to be a battle. If the government running Taiwan was willing to negotiate a peaceful reunification a lot of blood and misery could be saved.
    3
  285.  @Ashphinchtersayswhat  I love what I've seen of China, both inside and out. And they've progressed so far, so fast. It's just incredible. I just wish we could get over ourselves and get along better. I think the whole world would benefit immensely from Sino-American cooperative leadership.
    3
  286. That's only half the story. Americans are brainwashed in the cult of liberal democracy. Anger with the PRC for not collapsing and being successful is palpable.
    3
  287.  @NangongReng1973  Sometimes I wonder if Mao isn't the reincarnation of the Xihuangdi. Both created a totally new concept of China. Both unified the country which was torn apart at the time by warlords. Both simplified the written language in order to bind the country together. Both rejected Confucianism. Both attempted to destroy the past and destroyed a lot of scholars in the process. Both ruled with a paranoid iron fist. I'm sure there are a lot of differences, but the similarities are striking.
    3
  288.  @NangongReng1973  When I visited China I was surprised by how much of a positive image he still had considered the damage that could be laid at his feet. The Chinese people seem to be very forgiving. I just finished a book about the Chinese experience during World War II, told mostly through the lens of Jiang Jieshi's nationalist government in Chongqing but with sizable sections viewed from both the communist enclave and the puppet regime. The Chinese suffered a lot when they were weak and the Chinese people remember that. I think for many Chinese the ends have more than justified the means.
    3
  289.  @georgewu5  He was definitely a critical Chinese leader. It's hard to know what China would now be without him. It definitely would be different. Deng probably didn't save 800 million from starvation. The famine had been over for decades. He did bring 800 million out of poverty though. Would that have been possible without Mao? I don't know. Most likely Deng would have not been the leader in China without the success of the CCP, so, without Mao we probably wouldn't have had Deng.
    3
  290. Of course the Chinese government is encouraging its overseas supporters, especially among its own citizens. The territorial integrity of the state is being threatened. A government that chose not to encourage its supporters in these circumstances would be grossly incompetent.
    3
  291.  @Courage2006  This is what I'm talking about. It doesn't matter what Taiwan considers itself. China is going to take it back regardless. Now this can be done the easy way, or the hard way. And that choice is largely up to Taiwan. Taiwan can be intransigent and go in kicking and screaming. This will get a lot of mainland Chinese killed. It might get a lot of Americans killed. And it will get Taiwan as you know utterly destroyed with craploads of death and misery accompanying it. The other option is to accept reality and maybe preserve some of the things they consider important based on negotiation.
    3
  292. Russia as it currently operates would probably see this as an opportunity to unseat the U.S. as world superpower and see China reduced at the same time. They'll probably side with the Chinese, which if they do so openly would really change the calculus. Unless China has done something horrific I can't see Europe sending support and even countries like Korea may want to see how things play out before securing the long-term enmity of the colossal neighbor.
    3
  293.  @errormatrix4159  So what if it wasn't a case of clear Russian aggression? What if one or more of the Baltic states poked the bear?
    3
  294.  @erikdekter2384  No I'm not. I don't think it's likely that one or more of the Baltic nations would antagonize Russia beyond passive-aggressive rhetoric, but if a nationalist government threatened the welfare of the ethnic Russians living within their state, I could see Russia considering that as provocation. And frankly, it would be.
    3
  295. Professor, you speak a lot about China, which, as a Sinophile since age four, I very much appreciate. While you mentioned India briefly, I wonder if you could give your opinion on the prospect of India succeeding in the future to the degree that China is succeeding now. There seems to be a real split in opinion on Indian prospects. I myself am dubious, despite the fact that I genuinely want India to succeed, I see BJP policy as oppressive to India's Muslim minority, and along with India's caste system and deeply entrenched corruption, I find Indian prospects to be weaker than hoped. What do you think?
    3
  296. It was freed in 1997.
    3
  297. Centrifugal artificial gravity is not lifetimes away. If near-Earth gravity is necessary for gestation, it's achievable currently, so long as you have enough space, materiel, and energy to erect a large centrifuge.
    3
  298.  @poorchristopher15  As a former soldier I assure you that weather matters a great deal in battle.
    3
  299. Bill Clinton was impeached by the House. He wasn't convicted and removed from office by the Senate.
    3
  300.  @kasikwagoma6740  If you look at the countries that have become economically powerful during the last two centuries, only one was a democracy when it made that transition. That one democracy built its wealth on the annhilation of its indigenous peoples, the labor of captured slaves, and the exploitation of waves of desperate immigrants. Africa should unite, and once united it should look at the true success stories of the last century and a half: Germany under Bismark, Meiji Japan, Taiwan under Chiang Ching-kuo, South Korea under Park Chung-hee, and yes, the Soviet Union and Communist China. The way out of poverty and into industrialization is through a strong government that can pool the resources of the country and focus those resources on the fundamental industries necessary to strengthen the state without having to spend all your time and energy making expensive promises to electoral blocks. It's important to limit tribal identity to the cultural realm and keep it out of the political realm, and it's absolutely crucial to come down hard on corruption, especially when it surfaces among tribal elites.
    3
  301.  @perkele2040  Yeah, I don't see China losing a war in China. I could see them losing in the open Pacific, but they have a pretty good missile defense system and they can out-produce the Americans. It would take a total combined world assault to defeat China in China, and China hasn't pissed off everybody to the point that they're willing to sacrifice their children to make a point.
    3
  302.  @JD-yz4kr  I think there is some truth to that.
    3
  303. Thanks for clarifying 'cuz steak was totally offended.
    3
  304. Yeah, the term "Chinese" should be used similarly to the term "American". Chinese are the people of China regardless of ethnicity. The main ethnicity in China is Han which itself is an accretion of diverse peoples assimilated in ancient times.
    3
  305.  @tenderheart7530  If they are "given" a stretch of land-locked, resource rich land at the intersection of Turkish, Persian and Arab civilization, they're probably going to be victims of genocide no matter what. I feel for them.
    3
  306. I'm not sure you how you annex a place that's already part of your country.
    3
  307. Donald Trump is definitely unfit for office. The problem with executing the 25th amendment is that the amendment outlines the rules for a palace coup d'etat. I can't think of a worse precedent to set. As much as I despise Trump and fear the things he's trying to accomplish I do not think his imminent removal is a better result for the country (or the world for that matter) than the setting of this disturbing precedent yet. However, if he were to give an order for a nuclear attack for any other reason than retaliation for an incoming nuclear attack than his danger to humanity would warrant such an action and I would hope the cabinet would have the courage to enact it.
    3
  308. "Ukriane has more resolve to continue fighting than Russia." Don't bet on it. Russia is fighting for self respect and they will over time put everything they have into this contest.
    3
  309.  @electrogestapo  I don't think China has any real enemies right now. The closest would be the United States, Australia, Japan and India. I think Australia and India would be negligible military allies except for staging purposes. If Japan opts in, which I think is a very questionable proposition, after all, they have the most to lose, they could bring some fire to the stove. It's possible (and maybe even probable) that other countries would view a forceful Chinese repatriation of Taiwan as grounds for determining China to be an enemy, but most of those countries are a long way from the field of battle and, with the possible exception of Britain, probably unwilling to sacrifice their children to stop it. I don't see Russia siding with the United States against China. To the extent that they get involved at all, it will probably be to supply raw materials to China. Despite what some folks are saying about the feelings of love for America from Russia's youth, Russia's interest will be for the degradation of power in both the United States and China. They'll probably do their best to keep the conflict going and to keep the conflict localized. There are countries that have issues with China in the region, but they are substantially smaller than China in all regards and they're not going to piss in the eye of the local dragon at the behest of an unreliable eagle that lives on the other side of the sea. The more balanced the power between the United States and China, the more careful China's neighbors will be in walking the tightrope between them. If China is not already at war with their neighbors, then their neighbors are not going to go to war with China.
    3
  310.    Ideally, sovereign countries can do what they will. Realistically, weak countries are at the mercy of strong ones. If Ukraine moves to join NATO, Russia will move to stop them, sovereign or not. It is against Russia's interest for Ukraine to be in NATO. As long as Russia has the ability to stop it, they will, regardless of what Ukraine wants.
    3
  311. This is no invasion. This is nonsense. We could absorb ten times the immigration levels that we have today and it wouldn't hurt us at all. In fact, it would make the country a much better place. The people that are making the effort to get into the United States are people with a strong will, a fantastic work ethic, and a fundamental desire to participate in the American dream. We didn't even have a restrictive immigration policy until 1890 when we passed the Chinese Exclusion Act. Our first immigration policy was blatantly racist, and every one since has been racist as well. I could see an argument that those that want to enter should enter at the assigned entrance locations, but only if those that wanted in were allowed in. Sure, if someone is a fugitive or a criminal then we'd have grounds for keeping them out. But once a background check produces no red flags, just tell them that they can't work for less than minimum wage, they have to pay the proper taxes once they get a job, they have to register for selective service, and let 'em in. If we need to disperse the population of newcomers so that the entire burden doesn't fall on Texas and California, fine, spread the wealth. Immigrants don't hurt this country; they make this country.
    3
  312. George Carlin put it well when he said we have no rights, only privileges that can be taken away.
    3
  313.  @abc0to1  China was actually one of the last places the Mongols expanded into. They tried to go into Japan but the weather didn't cooperate. Xinjiang, Tibet and Mongolia were brought into China as the Mongols took over from the Song and established the Yuan Dynasty as one of the four khanates—the others being the Ilkhanate in Persia, the Chigatai khanate in Central Asia, and the Golden Horde in Siberia and Eastern Europe.
    3
  314.  @Theoryofcatsndogs  The CPC is nothing like the Nazis. They're not racists, they're not warmongers, they certainly aren't wholesale murderers. Your comparison is disgusting.
    3
  315. Sounds like diplomacy.
    3
  316.  @ayi3455  I don't know if regaining outer Mongolia is on the ultimate to-do list or not. It's certainly not something China wants to bring up right now. China's got too many other territorial issues and until those are resolved they will almost certainly not pick a fight with Russia. I would not be surprised either way in the end though.
    3
  317.  @ayi3455  I understand the ambiguity of it all. The nation-state is a nineteenth century Western concept that never really applied well to China anyway. The world would be better off if it were scrapped altogether; it's cost millions their lives over the last two-hundred years and it has really brought out the worst in all of us. I don't have too much of a problem with your defining today's China with the Han. It makes a lot more sense than 1949. I certainly would define it earlier but your definition is not without merit.
    3
  318. It appears to me that China has three weak areas militarily in comparison to the United States: fighter aircraft numbers, aircraft carrier numbers, and submarine silence. China appears to have military advantages in missiles and missile technology, drone numbers, overall manufacturing capacity, and if a conflict developed around Taiwan, logistical proximity. I'm pretty sure that China's not confident that they can guarantee success at this point, and I don't think they are likely to move until they are.
    3
  319. Hong Kong is not, nor has it ever been, a country. It is now and has always been a part of China. If Hong Kongers want to claim China, that's great, so long as they claim it as Chinese.
    3
  320.  @wread1982  "Has nothing to do with race" —sure it doesn't.
    3
  321.  @kindface  Thank you for the kind words.
    3
  322. I disagree. Consensus is not required, though it would be nice and result in far less death and misery.
    3
  323.  @Harthorn  The government of the PRC is as normal as any other government being that there is no absolute standard of normalcy. In the absence of a global government with the power and authority to force compliance of states, playground rules apply. You get what you have the strength to take and are willing to accept the consequences for. That goes for all governments including mine (USA).
    3
  324. Carriers are more effective in some situations than in others. Marines are going to need air support and if the target is a long way from a friendly airfield the carrier can provide that. Certainly in a conflict with a relatively weak foe carriers can act as effective hammers as well as contribute to the area air superiority. Also, during peacetime nothing says "Don't ignore me!" quite like a visit from a carrier group. The costs and rebuild times of capital ships seem to have made naval powers reluctant to engage each other at least during the World Wars. It's during these all-or-nothing wars though that we really learn which weapons can get by which defenses and how vulnerable these vessels actually are. Of course there are other less direct influences on this as well, especially the ability, or inability, of a force segment to avoid detection. Also, things like communications interception and code-breaking have played huge roles in who defeats whom especially in the open ocean. And then there is luck: A commander who dooms their people by engaging prematurely without enough information to make a sound decision could on the other hand be the commander who doesn't seize the opportune moment because s/he is afraid to engage without a better understanding of the battlefield details. Sometimes being aggressive is the path to victory, other times it's the best way to get slaughtered, but I digress. The supercarrier is a remarkable weapon, and given the choice, I'd rather enter the war with a fleet of them than without, and I think that will be the case for some time.
    3
  325. The Russians are rotating, but yeah, Putin may have trapped himself a bit with his declaration that he won't be using conscripts in battle.
    3
  326.  @nehronghamil4352  But not on the front lines, presumably.
    3
  327.  @theFLCLguy  There is no proof that this shit is happening.
    3
  328.  @Nesher92  "The best and only solution is for the prc to give up on a nation (Taiwan) that has nothing to do with the prc." If that's the case than there is no solution and a lot of people are going to die.
    3
  329.  @Nesher92  "The prc belif is not supported by facts. The Taiwanese one is." You're mistaken, but even if you were correct, it wouldn't matter. The PLA and the Taiwan defence forces are not going to face off in a debate. They're likely going to go to war.
    3
  330. I'm excited about this. I hope this artery greatly improves Lao's overall connection to the world and strengthens their economy, as well as southern China's.
    3
  331. If as you say protecting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are as progressive as it gets then Democrats are progressive because all Democrats will protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. These are some of the most core planks in the Democratic platform, and one of the huge differences between Democrats and Republicans. It's also technically conservative because it's protecting institutions that our current system relies on. In order to be progressive you have to be willing to go beyond protecting existing programs and instead push for sweeping changes such as universal single-payer health care, publicly funded higher education, universal housing and nutrition, affirmative action, etc. on the socialist side and nationwide legalization of marijuana, opening of borders, equal opportunity, etc. on the liberal side. We need progressives both within the Democratic party and in the wider public to keep moving the standards to a better place in the parts of the country that are comfortable on the left. But in the parts of the country where people view the left with intense skepticism we need people who can practice a little progressive therapy, helping communities that have lost the ability to progress to take some baby steps so that one day they can run again. Okay, crappy metaphor, but we need the left and we need the center-left and we need them to work together to move the country in the right direction. If we don't, then we don't get Republican-light, we get Republican ugly, and no, it won't give us a revolution and if it did, you wouldn't like it.
    3
  332. Who did just as bad or worse than the United States, Britain and Brazil? While the failures he listed may not have been the direct result of explicit decisions of the top leaders (though I'd argue that there were several that were), the failures he's attributing to bureaucrats sound to me more like the failures of the lack of support of bureaucrats to make good professional decisions that went against purely political postures. The lack of good supportive leadership hamstrung the bureaucracies, and that, along with decades of underfunding, left them unable to deal with the crisis in a timely and competent manner, which cost thousands of people their lives.
    3
  333.  @trollet9686  Thank you.
    3
  334.  @nunalol465  You're right, Hong Kong is not a communist country; it is neither communist, nor is it a country. It is a special economic enclave in a communist country. The country of the people that live in Hong Kong is China and to suggest that the seven million residents of Hong Kong determine the governing policies of the 1.3 billion strong country of China is preposterous. I know that's not what you meant, but that is what you said. As for the governing policies of the city, you can argue that the residents should have a strong say there. The problem is the leaders of the country are not willing to extend that power to the city's residents, and the residents are not demonstrating a responsible civic mind set.
    3
  335.  @elmohead  Yeah, that was kind of my point.
    3
  336. If only it were that simple.
    3
  337. The Romans spent their days watching people kill each other. Being an artist is great if you believe that people appreciate your art, otherwise it's horribly depressing. There's going to be some good coming out of this for people who feel shackled to their jobs right now, but there is also going to be a lot of disillusionment and probably a lot of corresponding chaos, violence and self-destructive behavior.
    3
  338. In the long run I think this is the best solution. If we don't wish to embrace obsolescence then we are going to have to become machines ourselves.
    3
  339. Genocide has become a charge where, once accused, there's no defense. Lots and lots of Ottoman Armenian civilians, because they were Armenian, were sent on a forced march from eastern Anatolia to the deserts of eastern Syria. Many of them were killed along the way. The argument that this was a genocide is not without merit. It is more complicated though. My understanding is that there were Armenian separatist terrorist groups that were attacking Turks and Kurds in eastern Anatolia, and who were acting as a fifth column for the Russian army, who their home country was technically at war with. These guerilla fighters would attack and then disappear into the civilian population. The answer from Istanbul was to temporarily relocate the Armenian civilian population away from the border regions in order to rob the separatists and their Russian allies of that tactical cover. From what I understand this march was insufficiently supplied. Some Ottoman officials in the region appear to have interpreted the orders as open season on Armenians and they had large swathes of them killed. Also Turkish nationalist mobs, including some Turkish and Kurdish nationalist gangs, attacked and killed Armenians during the march. Does this add up to a genocide? I personally think it does, but I don't think it's the equivalent of the Holocaust. I think that its intended temporariness, as well as the legitimate anti-treasonous reasoning for it are strong mitigators. If there was a kill order than it definitely was a genocide; I've seen it argued that there wasn't one but I haven't done the research myself. That the Turkish state prosecuted the identified killers after the war should also probably be considered, especially if blame is being laid on Turkey. So while I think these arguments should be considered, I still think the ethnically targeted and insufficiently supplied relocation, even if done out of incompetence rather than malevolence, does rise to the loosest definition of genocide, and certainly to the level of state-directed gross human rights abuse. It may be time to consider a more specific definition of genocide. It's being thrown out a lot these days, sometimes erroneously. It's a word that carries a painful scarlet letter for a state that is tarred with the moniker. And like I said at the beginning, once accused, the damage has pretty much been done.
    3
  340. She cuts off both of them but Pence is much more egregious when it comes to breaching the agreed upon limits.
    3
  341. So the track is already laid then?
    3
  342.  @nilsblom7869  I'm not sure what your definition of normal is but I think China is satisfied with its current state and trajectory.
    3
  343. I'm all for American leadership (post-Trump) but I don't see why it has to come at China's expense, or vise-versa. China's not pushing their style of government on anyone. There's no need to block or counter their efforts to seek influence especially if it's helping to modernize the world. There's plenty of world to lead and modernize out there. American investment would be welcome around the world and the Chinese wouldn't be bothered by it one bit unless the goal of it was strictly to undermine China. After this crisis the world is going to need strong countries to stand up and help carry the world on their shoulders. America has to be part of that, and so does China. A little bit of understanding and cooperation among the world's most powerful and influential countries would be in everybody's interest. As for mistakes made by the Chinese security apparatus at the beginning of this outbreak, there is some culpability, especially among Wuhan's local officials. Though considering how this virus spreads, how long it can spread prior to symptomatic evidence, and in light of the ineffectiveness of politically liberal nations to deal with the virus even with a firm knowledge of what the virus was and a month or more of time to properly prepare for it, I think the world is much better off right now because the virus did start in China rather than in Europe or America. It wasn't like the Trump Administration wasn't downplaying the virus. You didn't see anything like that from Xi Jinping. I don't think China's system is necessarily right for any given country. What China went through to become what China is today I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. Nonetheless, China is reaching out to the rest of the world right now to help the world beat this thing. There's no reason to assume that assistance comes with an ulterior motive, but even if it does, it's better that China does reach out and help, than that China shut the doors and tell world that they need to fend for themselves. The rest of the world understands that. I hope that when the United States gets this virus under control that we can act equally responsibly, even if it takes an ulterior motive to get us sufficiently motivated.
    3
  344. It's not working more, it's producing more. Much of the increase in production is due to changes in technology. The criticism still holds water though in that the benefits of the production increase, minus the costs of investment, should be shared between the workers and the firms, which has not occurred.
    3
  345. China has a strategic aversion to countries being torn apart because people are trying to do that to China. They also have sympathy to being surrounded by potentially hostile western allies, which is also happening to them. Whichever side they take is a compromise of their position. It's a bit of a lose-lose situation for them and they are going to come off as hypocrites either way, and they understand this. What's best for China is for nothing to happen, but that's kind of out the window now. The good news for China is that all parties in this mess are hypocrites, so their comparative standing among great powers shouldn't fall much.
    3
  346.  @oneviwatara9384  You really want to drag Mongolia into this? Because I'm sure China would be quite willing to take back Outer Mongolia when they take back Taiwan of the two are connected at that time.
    3
  347.  @cocochanel6495  When I was in the army about half the GIs were small town white boys (and girls). About thirty percent were black kids, mostly inner city. A good ten percent were Hispanics, many from Puerta Rico, the rest were Chamoros, Samoans and Asians. Unless things have changed, the army is a lot more diverse than you are indicating… and no, they won't ghost over attacking China any more than they ghosted over attacking Afghanistan. They'll obey orders and the consequences will follow.
    3
  348. Hong Kong belongs to China. The CCP also belongs to China, not the other way around.
    3
  349. The Chinese have already faced that demon. China has been reluctant to give Russia full-throated support on their actions creating independent enclaves inside the borders of other countries for that very reason. But in the last few years it appears that China sees encirclement as enough of a common threat to warrant tacit support of Russian moves despite the optical hypocrisy.
    3
  350.  @Americansikkunt  Not everybody who can't get laid is an Incel. It's a term that's been embraced by a particular social circle of men whose most vocal members are avowed antifeminists, some of whom have suggested and/or advocated violence towards individual women or, in some instances, against women in general, either in jest or not. The extent to which these particularly angry young men represent the entire Incel community is admittedly beyond my knowledge, but they are definitely the recognized face of the group. It's good that the man in the video is trying to engage without violent or hateful rhetoric, even if some of his statements are pretty chauvinistic. I hope that he's encouraging his fellow incels to cool down, to embrace their humanity, and to break away from the vicious commentary that at least a portion of the community spews forth. Being involuntarily celibate is a temporary state that most of us have been in. It sucks, and if you have no experience of affection it can appear to be permanent, but for the vast majority it's not. I don't see the subject of this video being permanently involuntarily celibate. He's got some issues, but he's not vile—at least not as he appears here. He'll escape it a lot faster though if he can get away from the misogynistic worldview that he's expressing. If he wants women to love him, he has to learn first how to love women.
    3
  351. 9:04 "Today we know command economies don't work." China: Go ahead and believe that.
    3
  352. Hey Alexander. I may not be totally in sync with my countrymen in the United States, but I don't think the war in Ukraine is going to carry that much weight in the U.S. election next year. I think there is still a predominance of sympathy for Ukraine, and what seems to be a built in animosity towards Russia (or more accurately towards Putin), but there aren't any American soldiers dying in the conflict or being exposed committing atrocities. I think this consensus spans both parties and so long as the conflict continues without a total Russian victory and Americans aren't obviously physically involved, the elections will ride on other issues. It'll still be talked about. Democrats will talk about how the current administration is helping Ukraine and Republicans will talk about incompetence in that support. Neither of these will be as strongly based on reality as on the message that is most useful for them during the election. What's going to decide it though are things like the walking back of decades of social progress by our courts, legal scandals, frustrations regarding the perceived slow pace of those legal scandals, and fear of what seems to be an ever more unpredictable economy.
    3
  353. Perhaps, but not necessarily. NATO is only obligated to participate if the United States is attacked, not if the United States gets involved in a civil war on the other half of the world. Our other allies are no more sincerely obligated. That's not to say they won't show. They might. Then again, they might not.
    3
  354. Greece is the beneficiary of sovereignty over a bunch of little tiny islands scattered all over the Eastern Med. They've kind of managed to do organically what the Chinese are trying to do in the South China Sea.
    3
  355. Democracy is not preserved by its winners, but by its losers, when they acknowledge electoral defeat and go home.
    3
  356.  @jjjose6129  …and the thrill of patriotic advocacy.
    3
  357. The local security forces in Wuhan do deserve some condemnation for intimidating Dr. Li after his Wechat messages, but they did start addressing the problem within days of that action, closing down a market where Dr. Li's infected patients had all shopped. And while "oppressive" may be an accurate portrayal of government actions, I think "brutal" is not. Most Chinese feel like the methods used to stop the expansion were entirely appropriate.
    3
  358. The problem with these folks and the First Amendment is that you have to read through all that balance of powers stuff to get to it. Although I wonder why it doesn't stop them when they're looking for the Second Amendment. Hmm…
    3
  359. Bring 'em. I'd rather have immigrants in my town than anti-immigrants.
    3
  360.  @stephenmcinerney9457  Even a broken clock's right twice a day. I still think that the prize is more about politics than it is about peace. Sometimes that's good. That Pakistani girl who won it a few years back for her advocacy for education of girls was exceptionally laudable, but technically she was stirring up trouble, doing the opposite of peace-making. Sometimes it's bad, like giving it to a Chinese dissident, also the opposite of a peace-maker, just to make a point about the supremacy of liberal democracy over benevolent autocracy. I don't remember the last time it was given out to an actual peace maker, maybe back in 1998.
    3
  361. She might get some unwarranted harassment but Iran is not Saudi Arabia. She'll be okay.
    3
  362.  @ihl0700677525  When you ask, "Why should America allow transgression by other nation when she possesses the strongest military ever exist in human history?" are you asking me that question, suggesting that America should flex its muscle to strong arm countries into abiding by our terms? Or are you answering the question in the negative when you say "America is not the 'protector of the world peace' and 'defender of justice', you know." I really wish your last refutation were true, but it just hasn't played out that way. With the exception of a few Middle Eastern countries we just do not abide a government that doesn't at least superficially match our template. We certainly don't tolerate communism, and probably not theocracy but with only one example out there it may be too little information on which to generalize. I do think that there is a large and growing segment of the population within the general public that is more accepting of ideological apostacy. But that group is not well represented either in the State Department (regardless of party control) or American media outlets.
    3
  363. Shelley Moore has to face election in 2020. Work to get this guy's recognition factor up throughout the state over the next two years.
    3
  364.  @covertpuppytwo3857  China is caught between two demons. On the one hand, China has a serious problem with breach of sovereignty, in no small part to the continuing attempts by western interests to stoke separatism, even to the point of terrorism, within China itself. In this respect China sympathizes with Ukraine whose sovereignty is currently being ignored by Russia. On the other hand, China has issues with western encirclement, diplomatic disrespect, and the sabotaging of influence by non-American great powers in their near abroad. On these issues they are very sympathetic to the Russian position.
    3
  365.  @Jumptohistory  "Well, if China is going to subjugate the Taiwanese by force then everyone will know what kind of country it is." Exactly. A powerful and confident country with ambitions to control its territory and unite its people.
    3
  366. College is only a scam if you're not there to learn. Personal academic interaction with a true expert in their field has a great deal of intrinsic value for those who care about more than padding a resumé.
    3
  367. While naval infantry, what in the states we call marines, are excellent combatants, their nature is offensive. That's not to say that they cannot defend, but it's not their specialty. They are proficient at a managed retreat however. There's a fantastic example of this in the Korean Civil War at the Battle of Chosin Reservoir in which the courage and determination of the U.S. Marines, along with dominant air cover, allowed for a withdrawal from an impossible situation. Sorry, I'm going off on a tangent.
    3
  368. By that logic, if my five demands aren't met I can trash my city with no consequences? You need a better argument. The people of Hong Kong can destroy their city so long as China thinks the consequences of stopping them outweigh the consequences of letting them continue. There is no valid legal argument for the continuation of the vandalism.
    3
  369. @John Brower I think with the exception of Coca-Cola, they'll pretty much get what they had.
    3
  370. Hypocrisy is the water we swim in. All sides participate in it, and it's truly unavoidable if you want to participate in global diplomacy. When your side acts it's right and just, when the other side acts, it's heinous, even if it's the exact same thing. It's a lot easier to convince your people that you have the moral high ground than it is to actually have the moral high ground, because committing to the moral high ground keeps you from actually accomplishing your goals.
    3
  371. I doubt your definition of the whole world extends beyond the friends of the United States. The west isn't totally in control anymore and it certainly doesn't represent the whole world.
    3
  372. What a heartbreaking story. And to think that so many in India are in this situation or worse.
    3
  373.  @ubroc  Russia is in a hell of a lot better position than it was twenty years ago. It's a much stronger country and much more respected. That's not to say it's better liked, especially in the west. Historically, underestimating Russia is a bad business. The indicators of power that the rest of the world uses don't always apply well to Russia. I don't want to presume too much. The criticisms of Russia and Russian power may be valid to some extent. I'm just not willing to put my faith in western analyses towards other peer powers, too many biases of assumed superiority in play.
    3
  374.  @ubroc  Keep drinking, I'll be outside.
    3
  375.  @Jupiter-td4kw  The closest genetic match to Jews are Palestinians. It looks to me like they're the same people, some forced off the land by the Romans, others made to convert to Christianity by them, and later to Islam by the Arabs. Those who remained and maintained their Judaism were wiped out by Crusaders. I hope at some point all the Palestinians, including the returning Jews, can come together again and finally end their collective tragedy. Netanyahu and his supporters are not being helpful in this regard.
    3
  376.  @ariesgirl9592  Yeah, I didn't see a good reason. I was wondering if I was missing something. When a cop pulls me over he usually just walks up to the window and asks me if I knew I was speeding or that my plates were expired. Before I made the obvious assumptions I wanted to see if somebody knew something I didn't.
    3
  377. We need the music otherwise the tone isn't ominous enough.
    3
  378. Jazz G it sounds like you know what is wrong with our country.
    3
  379.  @franciscomartins2656  There is no "this China". There is only China.
    3
  380. Mr. Ross, most of that U.S. market is still going to be there, it's just going to have more friction. China's probably going to be reluctant to devalue because while it compensates for some of the tariff barriers export-wise it would bump up the cost of living in China and it could give them problems politically with Europe and other export markets with whom they currently have some common ground vis-a-vis the Americans.
    3
  381. Are you suggesting that Chinese are not hard-working and peaceful, because recent history suggests otherwise, and the vast (and I really mean vast) majority of Chinese are satisfied to live under the governance of the CCP.
    3
  382. It's an effective tool of the enemy. That and most of their humor can only be told after the last minority member has left the room.
    3
  383.  @slueccroll4661  As opposed to the wonderful world we see today?
    3
  384.  @jamesli2040  The state was founded in 1948. The country is 4000 years old. A similar statement could be made about Korea.
    3
  385.  @drbuckley1  The independence of Taiwan does threaten the existence of a unified China, which is what the people of China expect the government to achieve. But you're right in one sense—China will survive as a concept as it has through many periods of dissolution. No Chinese outside of Taiwan wants to accept that version of existence though.
    3
  386. What I heard was that Iran told the United States where, when, and how they were going to retaliate so that casualties and the likelihood of further escalation would be minimized.
    3
  387. China is not aggressively atheistic. China does insist on having the ability to control the institutions within its borders, whether they are religious or not.
    3
  388. What does international adoption look like for children born in the United States?
    3
  389.  @marystevens8444  The question is, how many people are worth sacrificing and how many lives are worth ruining in order to achieve this elusive freedom? My answer is, it depends on the nature of the tyranny. If a tyrant is genuinely trying to take care of his people and he/she's not a total incompetent then I don't think the likely benefits to society of pursuing freedom outweigh the likely costs. This is especially the case considering that what replaces a tyrant after a revolution is usually another tyrant, as well as an ideological purity purge. There are and have been tyrants that are so incompetent, narcissistic. paranoid and sadistic that they had to go, but even among tyrants that combination is pretty rare. If the freedom you're willing to overthrow a functional government for is the abstract basket of freedoms that make up the Western Enlightenment dogma, then for the majority of people the results will be disappointing, if not catastrophic. If, on the other hand, the freedom you're willing to overthrow a functional government for is to free yourself and your people from a tyrant that cruelly abuses its people (and I'm not just talking about a couple of dissidents here and there), then perhaps it's a risk worth taking.
    3
  390. Oil is a secondary concern for Turkey if it's a concern at all. Turkey wants a buffer between the separatist Kurds within Turkey and any potential support network without.
    3
  391. It was an excellent idea for a country with a runaway population. That policy has a lot to do with China's current success.
    3
  392.  @ronniechew6566  From what I've seen, human rights advocates are a mixture of anti-authoritarians willing to do or say anything to bring down a non liberal-democracy, and well-meaning but gullible minions oblivious to the agendas of their masters or the consequences of such an agenda's success. That's not to say that they don't sometimes shine a light on real problems. But it appears that sometimes they fabricate problems so that their light has somewhere to shine.
    3
  393. They would be on the right side of history, but yeah, it wouldn't be viewed kindly by the United States, and it would also undermine the movement if discovered.
    3
  394. @perrandy2011 You had a good argument until you said "and higher taxes". While the deep south may not be backwards, your attitude is. The ridiculous aversion to public funding through tax revenue is a large part of what holds back the United States in general and the Deep South in particular.
    3
  395.  @mo337  "U.S. needs to get on that Taiwan side " Why? So that there can be a flashpoint for total war between superpowers in the Western Pacific forever? The sooner China is peacefully reunified, the safer the world will be. We should be encouraging Taiwan to negotiate reunification with the rest of the country.
    3
  396. Very few western leaders are military. Most are career politicians or bureaucrats with the next largest group being businessmen. Career officers would be after these—there are almost no leaders with enlisted experience.
    3
  397. I see three possibilities here that I will rank from least evil to most evil. The first is that it was a mistake—either a targeting mistake or an intelligence error. I haven't seen any sign of Ukrainian artillery going off-target before, especially regarding the HIMARS system, if that is what indeed hit the instalation and DPA says that the existence of the POW prison was common knowledge, but who knows? The second is that the Ukrainians believed that the facility was being used to store or hide Russian assets. This was the argument made by Russia when they attacked Ukrainian malls and hospitals, and in at least some cases there appeared to be pretty solid evidence that this was indeed the case. If this is the case then either Russia was hiding assets at the prison or Ukraine had an ingtelligence failure. The third possibility is that either Ukraine or Russia destroyed the facility with the intent of blaming the other side in hopes of demonstrating how evil the other side is. This is the only scenario I can think of where the Russians (or their allies) might be to blame. The fact that there were well over a hundred casualties among the prisoners and only eight among their captors seems a bit suspicious to me, but I don't know anything about running a prison so maybe I'm out of line on that suspiscion. Outside of the successful false flag expectation, whether perpetrated by the Russians or the Ukrainians, I don't see how benefits could possibly outweigh the costs of such a strike. Unfortunately, with this event and all others like it, we're never going to get an unbiased investigation, so I guess people will believe what they want to believe.
    3
  398.  @thomasmcgillivray3997  It is a serious escalation. What we don't know is: who is behind it, and why?
    3
  399. The map doesn't "show" that the PRC controls Taiwan. It shows that Taiwan is part of China.
    3
  400. Take care of yourself. Your situation looks concerning.
    3
  401. It depends a lot on where the war takes place and what each country's objectives were as well as who attacked whom and what the rest of the world thought about that. I don't think either side would benefit from a war nearly as much as it would cost them though and despite the ignorance of Trump I think both sides are aware of that reality.
    3
  402.  @macwilko  Not good enough for whom? For you? for me? for all their critics? China doesn't trust us any more than you trust them. I don't know how people could get further divided. Nobody accepts any reality outside of their preconceptions these days. China's already reached out to the world. They've provided most of the world's PPE and ventilators. It's looking like most people in the world are going to be vaccinated with Chinese vaccines. China may very well be hiding something. I'm certainly not privy to their inner concerns. But whether they are or not, they're going to be blamed either way. I mean, look at the comments. China has handled this crisis better than almost every country on Earth. If you account for the fact that during much of their experience they were flying blind, you can discount the "almost". Nevertheless, the vast majority of commenters, as well as the interviewer in the clip, totally ignored that reality and instead piled on to the narrative of Chinese incompetence, for which there is very little evidence, especially outside of the local tier of governance. The truth doesn't matter to the minds of those watching. China understands this and because of that there is debate within the government on how best to move forward in that reality. There may be the transparency you demand (though I'm not holding my breath). But if there is, it will be because China wants it, not because you demand it.
    3
  403. I don't think Iran was ever under the impression that Israel wouldn't respond. Iran had to respond in order to maintain the respect of its people. They tried to respond in such a way that Israel could dial it down without completely losing face, but I'm pretty sure that they never assumed that to be end result. After all, Israel hasn't dialed anything down for a very long time.
    3
  404. Please understand that the most you can expect from the U.S. or Europe is sympathy at a distance. No external government is going to get involved in this, probably not even China's. I'm not trying to be dismissive even though I don't really sympathize with your cause, but expecting tangible western support against China within a part of China is just unrealistic, especially considering we don't know what your endgame is; you guys seem to be moving the goalposts. You're probably relatively safe without western support though. Hong Kong doesn't have an army and the PRC can contain your movement by shutting down the border between Hong Kong and Shenzhen. So long as you're not destroying PRC assets or attacking their barracks I think they'll be satisfied to just let the protests play themselves out.
    3
  405. As is any capital ship.
    3
  406. It's too bad James Clavell has passed. This would be a great backdrop for one of his novels.
    3
  407. I wonder why having a business owned and controlled by a rich individual is compatible to the EU but having a business owned and controlled by a state is not.
    3
  408. adventwrath, I'll admit, I don't know a lot about this guy. I've heard his name tossed around a bit as a libertarian type. I'm a strong believer in the value of collective accomplishment through state government which is my definition for high aspirations for humanity. He seems to be advocating for more of an entropic future which to me seems like a sad future reminiscent of our sad past. I'm all for people taking responsibility for their actions and I appreciate people who can demonstrate ambition and succeed through merits like work ethic, drive, study and talent, but I still see a need for affirmative action for historically disenfranchised groups and he seems to be suggesting that that makes me and people who agree with me the leftist equivalent of neo-nazis, which is nonsense.
    3
  409.  @cookncrook6902  I think there are going to be a lot of men and women who are going to be unable to attract the mates they want. Whether or not they mate at all will depend on whether they are willing to settle for what's available. Women are no longer dependent on husbands to have a non-marginalized role in society, and, parents aside, no longer have that social pressure to wed. Without that matrimonial dependency men have less to offer and their role within a marriage is harder to sustain, and frankly, in many cases it's not worth the heartburn for men to try, and I stress the word try, to live up to the ridiculous standards necessary to keep a modern wife impressed.
    3
  410. There are a few folks here that I was railing on. I really do mean it when I say that I'm glad you've found success and that you are deserving of admiration for making good decisions and applying yourself. I just don't feel like everyone who has crappy lives necessarily deserves it. Some do, but not everyone. I've put a few years in at McDonald's when things got tough. Some of my coworkers there were amazing. Some, not so much. Some of the best felt very trapped and I was very nervous about being trapped their myself. And McDonald's is about the best company you can work for in that industry. I can get a little butt-hurt when I feel low-wage workers being disrespected. A lot of them really work their asses off and the rest of us benefit from it.
    2
  411. Well, I assumed you were younger too. And thanks for the conversation. It's been fun.
    2
  412.  @elitecassidy8258  Usually Qing Dynasty China is considered modern China, so the Taiping Rebellion would not be considered ancient China, but your main point is absolutely correct. China's internal conflicts have been apocalyptic and have probably heavily influenced the Chinese appreciation of social order.
    2
  413. My understanding is that most of the support for the insurgents is coming from Saudi Arabia, the other gulf states and from Turkey. The same is true of ISIS. Of course the government is receiving overwhelming support from Iran and Russia.
    2
  414. Two different states. One country.
    2
  415. "No. Japan was occupied by the US, UK, Soviet Union, and China for over 5 years. And before 1947, Japan elected their first prime minister and restructured their legislator (Diet). The Imperial State was removed from power." Itō Hirobumi, Japan's first Prime Minister, took office on December 22, 1885. The elected legislature, the Diet, was established in the Meiji Constitution enacted on November 20, 1890. As for the first post-war Prime Minister, according to Wikipedia, "Throughout the 1930s and before the war ended in the 1940s, Yoshida continued to participate in Japan's imperialist movement; in early 1945 he was the Munitions Minister, and attempted to construct underground armament-manufacturing facilities to protect them from aerial bombing. After several months' imprisonment in 1945, he became one of Japan's key postwar leaders." The postwar Japanese government, much like it's Imperial forebear, concentrated the resources of the country to the zaibatsu, the same powerful business clans that built the might of the empire. It was this economic policy, along with the innovation of Soichiro Honda, which propelled Japanese industry to rival and in many ways replace American industry.
    2
  416. I thought I had it. The solution I came up with was to say the color of your hat once if matches the hat in front of you and to say it twice if it doesn't match.
    2
  417. We're seeing a lot of white and some non-white cops and non-cops killing black men and boys,… and pregnant women who are either unarmed, fleeing or trying to comply, and it's scaring the crap out of the Black community. It appears that as a young black man there is no behavior sufficient to walk back from a deadly confrontation even when there should not have been a deadly confrontation in the first place. Also, whenever a black man that is not trying to hurt anyone is killed there is always a rush to defend the person(s) who killed him by invoking mistakes made by the victim. In this particular case it appears that a clear-headed officer without any racial or gender bias would not have killed Mr. Castile. And while both men involved may have made mistakes, the consequence for one (loss of employment assuming the police union doesn't get him his job back) is marginal the cost to the other is ultimate. This is why it is apparent that for an awful lot of Americans the lives of young black men don't matter as much as the vindication of those who killed them. And it is largely the same group of Americans who are angry with the Black Lives Matter movement for noticing.
    2
  418. There may be some truth to the media sensationalism of these tragic cases, but I think calling them lies is not correct. And if you really feel like these stories are lies then I think you are blinded by bias.
    2
  419. Okay… so how do we stop this from happening in the future?
    2
  420. Here's the thing. We have to stop this kind of thing from happening to the degree at which it's happening now. The rights of Philandro Castille of possessing a firearm and of operating a vehicle without harassment were infringed in this incident and others. Abrogation of rights of other people of all groups, but apparently of black men in disproportion, are also regularly occurring with insufficient consequence. I think we have three choices. We can change the standard of legal use of lethal force from "were you scared?" to "were you truly facing imminent loss of life?", we can take away the capacity of first line law enforcement to easily inflict lethal force until they can prove that they are responsible enough to use it, or we can admit that the lives of people interacting with the police and other frightened citizens just aren't important enough to require a a less trigger-happy approach, which is pretty much what we are doing right now.
    2
  421. Written Chinese has been simplified and consolidated twice, once under the Shihuangdi in the third century BC and once under Mao Zedong in the twentieth century AD. Both of these events have improved the power and utility of the script by broadening literacy within the state and tying the different languages together into a common single script. From a political standpoint the Chinese written language has been a much better tool for imperial cohesion than an alphabetic language would have been.
    2
  422. Any serious interstellar exploration and colonization would look like nothing you see on the television screen because moving human bodies and their habitats is ridiculously inefficient. Anyone travelling through space beyond the solar system will most-likely be doing it aboard a microchip or an energy beam. Movies, TV shows and video games usually require human actors, or at least their producers think that audiences will be more interested if they see people walking around. It also reduces the costs of special effects substantially, for now.
    2
  423.  sensin23  Regardless, peace will ultimately rely on Taiwan's understanding of their actual position.
    2
  424.  LanceS  I'm not familiar with Sikkim, but your depiction of Tibetans as having neither their culture, language, nor religion intact is factually incorrect. Tibet is modernizing, but both the Chinese central government and the Tibetan autonomous government have invested heavily and continue to invest in the protection and preservation of Tibetan culture, including the Tibetan language.
    2
  425.  LanceS  Yeah, whatever. You want Tibet and its people to remain museum pieces? I don't think the majority of Tibetans want that kind of life. Tibetan is taught along with Mandarin in Tibetan schools because that gives Tibetans a better shot at a prosperous life. There is no suppression of the Tibetan language, anymore than there is a suppression of Spanish in the United States. By the end of 2001, the Tibet Autonomous Region had a population of 2.63 million, of which 92.2 percent were Tibetans, 5.9 percent were Han people, while other ethnic peoples accounted for 1.9 percent. (http://www.china.org.cn/english/tibet-english/rkmz.htm) "Official statistics of the metropolitan area [of Lhasa] report that 70 percent are Tibetan, 34.3 are Han, and the remaining 2.7 Hui…"(Wikipedia)
    2
  426.  @83unsui  I don't know. You can pretty much find any narrative you want online. Most people will believe the narrative they want to believe and with no way to tell what's true and what's not, you can hardly blame them (us).
    2
  427.  @sunnyinsanya2  I don't think you're being fair. His explanation was good within the confines of his point but it did miss a lot of other aspects such as the advantage finished product manufacturers in the west get from the purchase of components tariff-free which benefits both the workers in those western factories and the consumers that purchase those products anywhere. Western food manufacturers (farmers) also benefit from low-tariff exports to China. It is imbalanced, which was the central point of his video, and at some point that imbalance needs to be addressed, but the current method of addressing the imbalance through large tariff hikes slows both economies down and costs manufacturing jobs in both locations and farming jobs in America while simultaneously raising costs, on food in China and on finished goods in the United States. In the medium run, China can probably force its banks to lend to factories so that jobs are preserved and, with a glut of durable goods, prices on finished products will probably go down which would tangentially increase demand. That particular solution doesn't work as well in the United States because the government would have to have the cooperation of the Federal Reserve to pump money into factories through banks as well as some radical alteration of bank regulation requiring the cooperation of Congress. And even if it did work, experience with supply side stimulus is that instead of money pumped into private firms going towards increasing labor-intensive production it usually goes into labor-saving capital investment or straight into the dividends of private firm owners. What does benefit the United States in this conflict is the short-term outcome. The sheer difference in trade quantity (read: the trade deficit) means that the black eye that China has to weather in the short term is a lot more painful than the one the United States has to sport. However, the last time China blinked, even when they were clearly in a losing fight, was back in the Opium Wars. I'm not sure I have any confidence that they are going to stop the trade war by acquiescing to Trump any time in the foreseeable future.
    2
  428. @i agree with you Tell that to our president—actually, don't waste your breath.
    2
  429. It almost certainly came from China, but this is the first I've heard it suggested that "they pushed the world to allow continued travel." Do you have some evidence for this?
    2
  430.    I think Maduro's support among "the common man" is definitely on the decline. But that is his base and he's certainly more popular in that demographic than he is with the doctors and lawyers.
    2
  431. Most of what Magicsteel1 says has some basis in fact. A lot of it is expressed from a Sinophobic angle though. Point for point: "China has track record of constantly oppressing and robbing South Asian countries until European countries(+Japan) came and kicked their asses." Assuming that he means Southeast Asian countries - China never had the political or military capacity to dominate South Asian countries - China has a complex history with her neighbors that varied from time period to time period and from region to region. By and large her relationships were in some ways beneficial and some ways detrimental. China has always been the culturally dominant entity in the region and during its periods of strength has taken a patriarchal approach which some found oppressive but it also provided peace and stability in the region which provided it's own forms of freedom and it often did so at its own cost, a noticeable example would be the protection of Korea from the invasions of Hideyoshi in the 1500s. "Their world view has not really changed in recent history; that they are center of world, or they should be, and the 'Central Country' cannot recede by an inch. Almost all neighboring countries have been attacked and subdued by China at some point and ended up paying tribute including humans." Their worldview has changed a great deal since the time of the Qianlong Emperor. Chinese today are well aware of the rest of the world and most are sober enough to understand that the United States is the dominant state in today's world and that that will continue to be the case for many decades to come. Historically, most countries that have been attacked and subdued by China are now part of China, and that is a very real example of China's history as an aggressor, but most of China's current neighbors have never been subdued by China. The northern half of Korea, Mongolia and some parts of Russia were and afterwards they were part of China for a time. It is true that China has regularly been very aggressive in their use of diplomacy and economics which manifested in the tributary system. And while it's true that some tribute was in the form of concubines and eunuchs, the end of the tributary system coincided with the height of the Atlantic slave trade. Needless to say, human rights standards have evolved around the world since then. "Onto more recent history, they are currently invading 'South China Sea', claiming that this sea belonged to them from ancient times although the sea is surrounded by Southern Asian countries. After building artificial islands on it, they now run military post there." The term "invading" here is clearly anti-Chinese. While I think the nine-dash line is a little dubious as a legitimate claim marker the Chinese feel very strongly that those waters have always been theirs since long before the current rules came into existence and that others are trying to steal away their legitimate territory. That being said, Magicsteel1 is understandably perturbed that the Chinese are taking such measures to physically defend their claim to these contested waters. This is getting really long I'll try to classify his other points with less commentary. "Corporations have to maintain 'quanchi'(relationship) with CCP just to run businesses. When Western companies come in, they are forced to work with their local businesses, give up their trading secrets, then get kicked out by Chinese government harassing them. They censor internet and force Apple to do their bidding just to do business there." You wanna live in my house, you gotta follow my rules. Not all governments roll over for their corporate masters. "They spy on their own citizens, arrest certain religious groups and sell their organs." Falun Gang propaganda. A few instances involving overzealous prison wardens may have occurred but this has never been government policy nor has it been condoned by the CCP. "…and hold down Tibet by force." True "When South Korea invited US to install THAAD to defend against North, China harassed Korean companies and tried to prevent their citizens from traveling there as retaliation." True "They're preparing 'social score' system to rate and grade everyone and manage them." This is true and many in China are viewing it with some degree of apprehension. On the other hand, the government is really getting tired of failing to get people to quit engaging in deceptive, dangerous and unhygienic behavior - something that I can sympathize with as a Portlander. It will be interesting to see how it plays out. "When somebody criticize CCP outside of China, often they try to put political pressure on foreign powers to silence them." The Chinese government can be thin-skinned when it comes to certain critics who they think could be particularly aggravating nuisances such as the Dalai Lama. I don't think MagicSteel1 has anything to be worried about. "Their ambassadors keep track of Chinese college students studying abroad and send them to run political protests." I think MagicSteel1 underestimates the patriotism felt by many Chinese students studying abroad. "Some Hollywood actors are banned from China for making movies critical of them." True, and understandable. "They threaten to invade Taiwan by force if they ever claim independence although they are two countries in reality. They have threatened travel companies to post Taiwan as part of China." Taiwan is part of China, and except for the period of Japanese occupation Taiwan has been governed as part of China since the early Qing Dynasty beginning in 1683, a lot longer than any part of America, the Caribbean or the Pacific Islands have been part of the United States. This is also longer than Okinawa has been part of Japan. The governing state on Taiwan is the Republic of China. The debate isn't whether or not Taiwan is part of China but rather which government rules all of China, Taiwan included. So except for the "although they are two countries in reality." illusion MagicSteel1 is correct. The PRC will invade Taiwan if its government declares the island not to be part of China.
    2
  432. Apparently you didn't listen to the last sentence of the presentation.
    2
  433.  @pseudotatsuya  Are you saying they stole the track-laying technology too? Even with "stolen" technology, you still need the mobilization, and that's investment as well as resource management and allocation. There's nothing stolen about that.
    2
  434.  @triumphant39  As a fellow American I think there is a flaw in your logic. Anything can happen over time and China surpassing the United States militarily at some point is no more ridiculous than assuming that the United States would one day surpass the might of the British Empire back in the day. The U.S. military today is much larger than the Chinese military and will be for some time. Right now the U.S. is producing large stocks of modern cutting edge equipment which is the best in the world. While China is technologically behind the U.S. it is concentrating on producing a few cutting edge armaments so that it can catch up technologically without sinking more resources into production of what may yet be inferior platforms beyond what's necessary to mount a credible defense of its territory and maybe a little intimidation of its weaker neighbors. I suspect once the Chinese feel confident in the parity of Chinese weapons and training to that of the United States you'll probably see a lot more production. And because weaponry and training become obsolete quickly, numerical parity of effective weaponry can be achieved in a relatively short time once the arms race is on. A really good example of this is Soviet Russia vs. Nazi Germany in WWII.
    2
  435.  @joemikey278  If China destroys an American carrier battle group then the two countries are at war. Should the United States attack Chinese territory with nuclear weapons (assuming that China didn't use nuclear weapons to destroy the carriers) than that would be a serious escalation and probably more than what non-Trumpian military commanders would order because it very well could lead to mutually assured destruction. We believe that the United States has a lot more nuclear weapons than China. And that may very well be correct, though China has what is believed to be a nationwide tunnel complex worthy of a herd of Bond villains and if we know what's in those tunnels it hasn't made it to my ears. Neither side has any strong desire to go to war with the other but China has a lot of unfinished business in the region and the status quo that we're trying to preserve is one that the Chinese don't feel like they have any investment in or expected return on. But the Chinese are careful and smart and usually the Americans are too. Both sides are perfectly happy to shake their finger at each other without picking up any rocks.
    2
  436. China has been politically ambivalent on the war since its inception. China had, and still has, close relations with both countries, and it has political ideals contradicted by both sides. China is in agreement with Russia that the United States and her allies cannot be allowed to continuously encroach into the historical spheres of influence of other regional hegemons like themselves. In fact, they intend to see the encroachments of the last two centuries rolled back later in this century. But they also don't approve of the carving up of other states and claiming that those living within a controversial region should have the right to separate themselves from the state to which they belong. China is having to straddle an ideological paradox here, and the sooner it ends without the total collapse of either state, the better.
    2
  437. As an American I'm sorry that you got caught in our international pissing contest with China/Iran. I understand that many Canadians see a nuance that differentiates the Chinese arrests of the two Canadians against the Canadian arrest of Ms. Meng. I think that kind of nuance is lost however outside of the First-World academic and nationalist circles. And while I recognize the treaty/rule-of-law point of view, I can't with a straight face say that Ms. Meng's arrest was not ludicrously inappropriate, stoked by our president's vicious desire to threaten Iranian eradication (and to punish those who don't enable it) as well as his fear of Chinese technological superiority in certain fields. I wish I could give Canada good advice on this but the best hope for Canada as well as the Canadians caught up in all of this is for Trump to override all of this nonsense through the strong-arming of American courts (undermining American rule of law in the process) or abandoning the cruel sanctions he's levied against Iran which we claim Ms. Meng is in violation of. That, of course, is nothing to be counted on.
    2
  438.  @whatwhat5948  Considering that most Americans are in their own debt trap (we haven't made enough money to pay for our consumption expectations in decades), I'm not sure how much liberty we actually have. We can certainly complain about our government within reason (for now), but our excuse for a democracy has left us with a belligerent and incompetent fool of a leader, a weak, undermanned and underfunded government, and a structurally calcified legislature that can't concentrate quickly or mobilize effectively even during a catastrophic health crisis. That being said, I don't want to give up on our democracy; it's part of the very definition of America. If we expect to be able to determine our system of government and we expect to be permitted to influence the rest of the world, then China should be afforded the same privilege. If our system is really better, than we should have no problem competing with anybody.
    2
  439. From China's point of view, if the United States is going to to try to keep them from reunifying the country, then they have to have a strong enough military to keep the American navy, and any allies they bring along, far enough away so that they don't successfully interfere. This means they have to have a navy that's almost as strong as the U.S. Navy, and the building and staffing capacity to replace losses. That's a huge order, and it can only be done with a huge cutting edge navy, air force, and missile stockpile. Also, what we're seeing in Ukraine is that drones are the newest game changer on the battlefield, and that is going to effect relatively slow-moving ships and maybe even submarines. That has to be accounted for as well. If Taiwan resists, China is going to need time to overcome that resistance. That means the United States has to be kept at arms length. That means China needs a World War sized navy, air force, missile force, drone force, and space force. They understand this, and they will build accordingly. And while I think they want to have the capacity to take Taiwan by the end of the decade, even if it is defended by the USN, I think they will try to find a peaceful reunification until 2049, unless that looks hopeless. Right now China doesn't see that as hopeless.
    2
  440. I agree with Professor Wolf on so many things but I think on this particular subject there may be some daylight between us. Just-in-time sourcing is very efficient when everything works. And because of that, trying to compete with a competitor that uses just-in-time sourcing without using it yourself means that in times that the supply chain is functioning as designed, you're going to get your clock cleaned. Redundancy and warehousing allows a business to weather a certain amount of crisis. When the supply chain breaks down for whatever reason, those firms that have a little inventory can continue doing business while their just-in-time competitors have to shut down. So firms have to balance between efficiency and sourcing security when they decide how much redundancy they can tolerate during peak competition. Redundancy has its place, it makes a business flexible, but it is expensive, so the costs and benefits of each approach have to be considered. As for local sourcing vs. global sourcing, I'm of the opinion that a firm should source what works best for them whether it is local or not. I think that choosing local businesses over better quality non-local businesses is a form of xenophobia and I am very much against that. Societies definitely have an interest in producing some key products to make sure that their immune from things like blockades or other service interruptions, and that is the responsibility of government to guarantee, but once those floors are reached then everyone should have a fair crack at the remaining business regardless of their location.
    2
  441. Not if rioters are constantly shutting down the infrastructure.
    2
  442. American companies, especially manufacturers and retailers, wanted cheap components. That trade impediment is going to be what hurts American companies and workers the most.
    2
  443.  @billkrebaum  So what are you claiming, that it's Japanese? In perpetuity lasted for less than a lifetime. Taiwan is no more Japanese than Hong Kong is British or Macau is Portuguese. And as for the old history, the Spanish and Dutch occupations were single generation holdings as well. 1683 to now with a brief Japanese occupation in the early part of last century makes Taiwan as Chinese as any US state's history makes it American. And as for the indigenous people, the indigenous people of Taiwan are Chinese in the same way that the indigenous people of New York are American, and they're probably better treated.
    2
  444. As long as it doesn't overwhelm the hospitals, it's not the worst-case scenario. It's still a problem.
    2
  445.  @香料國境  I trust them more I trust anti-communist figures, which would be my only alternative. Regarding this particular event I'm not aware of any other figures being presented. I'd have thought that pro-Chinese koolaid would be red, or at least pink, being comminist 'n all. But you're right, my heart is blue. I'd love to get paid for expressing my thoughts, but alas, I'm not that important. I'm glad that you are though. We could all use a little extra cash now and then.
    2
  446. China's growth rate in 2023 was 5.2 percent. You can't have peaked if you're still growing. The U.S. grew at 4.9 percent in the same period. You could argue that China's growth is not substantially outpacing the United States' growth at this time, but that's not the same as peaked.
    2
  447. OP it does worse things than that.
    2
  448. I don't know about the number "160 million"; I doubt that there are that many people who truly "love" their plan. However, the concerns regarding the more ambitious plans probably fall into a few categories. Firstly, unions. Union membership and power has been on the decline for forty years now and taking away the ability for unions to negotiate a medical benefits package for its members seriously undermines their justification for existence. Now while this is a cynical and self-serving point of view vis-a-vis union leadership, it shouldn't necessarily be dismissed out of hand. Workers suffer with the emasculation of organized labor and policies that further undercut unions will hurt all workers whether or not they are organized. Secondly, some workers. What a union can negotiate for its members varies from union to union and from company to company. Some workers have very good plans that allow them to go to the doctor that they're comfortable with and that covers everything they need with little to no employee contribution. While sweetheart deals like these are increasingly rare, they do still exist and workers that have these plans are naturally going to be reluctant to support anything that might jeopardize them. Thirdly, clueless people. Some people have bare minimum plans that don't cost them much. These plans prove catastrophically insufficient when a medical emergency appears, but these folks have never had to test their plans because they've been healthy enough to avoid any medical service. And lastly, rich people. Some people are wealthy enough to self insure and the additional costs to them of taxation outweighs what they are likely to pay for medical needs. There are also a lot of people who probably don't really love their healthcare but who are afraid of the risk of trying to enact a single-payer comprehensive health program and falling short, thereby endangering what currently exists. These people fear losing what they have by overreaching, and because of this they would prefer a more incremental approach. Personally I think that a comprehensive single payer approach would be the best overall healthcare option for our country. I think it would benefit most people. I also think it would benefit the better corporations who would no longer have as much of a legacy cost as they try to compete with firms who don't take care of their workers. I am concerned about the damage it would do to unions, but at this point most unions aren't able to get their workers good medical benefits anyway. It would be a sad irony if the success of a single-payer health plan turned out to be the death knell of American organized labor.
    2
  449. I'm interested in that document you flashed near the beginning saying that revolutions usually pan out. I'm leery of the idea of revolution because the ones I'm familiar with have usually led to a great deal of bloodletting, not only regarding the overthrown class, but also between the factions of the revolutionaries, with the people having to individually negotiate the political winds in order to avoid falling afoul of the new doctrine, which may change overnight. You may have a good argument that in the long run revolutionary change improves the lives of people where a stultifying class structure has become calcified. But I certainly would be worried in the short term about survival of self and kin during the inevitable ideological purity purges that would likely permeate the short term. Is it worth it? Good question. Maybe…, in some cases…, after all other potential means are exhausted.
    2
  450. @Michael Griffiths It's kind of funny how people talk about China's impending problems. On the one hand, there are going to be too few workers because of the one-child policy. On the other hand, all the workers are going to loose their jobs to technological innovation. The technology threat is real, and it's global. It's not just China that's going to have to deal with it. I don't know which countries are going to have the most successful approach to this issue but I think China's largely technocratic system is one of the best suited to deal with it. And I do think the narrowing population outlook will actually help China with that particular challenge, even as it forces the country to confront its aging population, probably with targeted investment in social safety nets for the elderly. China is gradually changing its labor focus from assembly line manufacturing to research and investment and to the service economy. This is, as you suggested, a result of wage increases across the country. All countries struggle to some degree with this kind of transition and China is no exception. But here again, China's system is fairly fleet-footed regarding systematic changes. I think China is better off moving from labor intensive manufacturing into technological manufacturing than it would be if it were still trying to crawl out of a pre-industrial (India) or failed industrial (Russia) economy.
    2
  451. Hey I got a joke for you. When my policies get sick let's not test you so that when you die I don't have to bear any responsibility. Ha, ha, get it?
    2
  452. Yeah, when I ask for a hit job, then I damn well better get a hit job.
    2
  453.  @Courage2006  "I'm well aware of the history. But a civil war that hasn't been active for seventy years isn't legally relevant today. There are lots of 'unfinished' wars around the world. That wouldn't make it right to restart decades-old wars." Fine then, don't restart it. Start negotiating for a peaceful reunification instead.
    2
  454. Because they need a dishwasher and that's the least they could legally pay them?
    2
  455.  @smeb4086  You asked why someone would hire a dishwasher for 15/hr. If that's the least you can pay for a dishwasher and you need one badly enough than that's why you would pay that much.
    2
  456.  @smeb4086  And I think the government's role is to take care of the people even if that means taking over businesses if they're not doing their part. Neither you nor I are going to see our respective visions achieved and there are many who don't share our visions that are relieved about that.
    2
  457.  @imthebest1832  Syria will always be a failed state if we always support those trying to tear it apart.
    2
  458. It's terrible for the child to discover that the parents that raised them were either duped into participating in a nefarious activity, or did so knowingly. Now there are a couple of strangers who love them and miss them who they're now supposed to love back while the whole process is trying to tear them apart from the parents they know.
    2
  459. I think the idea that NATO would send troops against China is a bit of a stretch. It would probably be the United States, Britain, Australia and maybe Japan.
    2
  460.  @waymakersral  Ideally Iran and Israel would make peace with each other. They are not natural enemies and it would be great for the region. There are a lot of issues that they would have to negotiate first though and it's definitely in Iran's interest to have a small but permanent nuclear arsenal in place in advance.
    2
  461.  @KenOtwell  China would like to trade with the United States. It's profitable and it leads to a more integrated and peaceful future. But they no longer need it. They have a fully developed domestic market and the rest of the world is perfectly willing to trade with them.
    2
  462.  @darginmahkum3190  You certainly know a lot more about this than I do. I'm basing my statement, not on the details in Turkey, but on the tendency of coalition governments to struggle to survive everywhere. If Kilicdaroglu is charismatic and astute enough to garner the long-term support of the majority of power wielders in Turkey, including the support of the people—particularly the people in the countryside, then he might be strong indeed. It would be a historical anomaly though, most coalition leaders don't last long and accomplish very little during their brief reigns. I certainly would like to see someone less conservative running things in Turkey. Before Erdogan came to power Turkey was the most progressive country in the region. It would be nice to see that again.
    2
  463.  @darginmahkum3190  Well then, best of luck to you and to the people of Turkey. I hope it goes as well as you think it will.
    2
  464. Putin hasn't said he intends to go to war. Western observers are extrapolating this intention from troop movements within Russia which are meant at least in part to intimidate the Ukraine. Putin's basically saying, "I'm not gonna kill you, but I can if I want to."
    2
  465. Al Gore said it best when he described Lincoln as the first great Republican president… and the last great Republican president.
    2
  466.  @vadfarkas14  About half of the Americans at the time of the revolution spoke German. I don't think language is that much of a barrier, but history…? Whether or not it ever comes to pass, Europe will be a superpower if they form a superstate. If they do not, then they will not. It's up to the people in Europe to decide whether they're willing to accept the costs in order to reap the benefits. I never said it was inevitable.
    2
  467.  @neolink8197  Actually there was a great deal of German immigration into the colonies and much of the interior was peopled by German speakers, particularly in Pennsylvania and what would later be Ohio. I was probably a little generous to suggest half of the population. I've been looking for numbers with limited success. I did come across one source that suggested that the vast majority of German speakers were first generation immigrants and that most colonists born in America had shifted to English. As to the Hessian mercenaries, they were a result of the same phenomenon that had so many Germans coming to America looking for a new future. Basically, with the destruction of the Holy Roman Empire in the Thirty-Years War (1618-1648) Germany was left in chaos with minor principalities, including the Electorate of Hesse-Kassel, trying to find their way in what was left of central Europe. Germany wouldn't be reunified until the North German Confederation was formed in 1867 and German speakers outside of Prussia, Austria and Bavaria were under severe pressure just to survive.
    2
  468.  @douglassmith1215  That's the thing with democracy. Democracy is not protected by the winners, it's protected by the losers, who accept the election results and allow their adversaries to govern for a term. Developing the kind of society that can consistently respect elections that disappoint them is a hard job. Because of this democracy is a very high-maintenance political system. Education is probably the most important tool for maintenance of such a system. The people have to know their responsibilities as governors.
    2
  469. It was approximately 6000 deaths. The number is even more remarkable considering the first explosion occurred in Wuhan and it was spreading all around while they were still trying to figure out if it was contagious. As for not believing the numbers, is there a reason beyond anti-Chinese bias for that?
    2
  470. Russia is already a great empire and their history with France is long and complicated. While I applaud the French overtures to recognize Russia's concerns I don't think anyone in Europe considers Russia as a potential member of a European federation. Nor do I see Russia accepting a position in a European polity in which it doesn't dominate. Russia and Europe can get along with each other, especially if the British and Americans are frozen out of the conversation, but there will always be a certain amount of tension between the two because Russia's just too big to be absorbed. Both Europe and Russia have complex distinct relationships with the other great powers, the United States and China, and trying to align their interests relating to these actors so that a single policy could be pursued would, in my opinion, be exceedingly difficult, especially as those two empires would see a Eurorussian entity as dangerously overpowered and would probably take measures to sabotage the arrangements. While I think that Europe and Russia should take all measures to ensure a good relationship between them, I don't think either a political union or a military alliance is in the cards for the foreseeable future.
    2
  471. Two systems was never realistic in the first place. It was agreed to because of British arrogance and Chinese expediency. Unfortunately the people of Hong Kong are proving to be victims of power politics played at a much higher than municipal level.
    2
  472. Neither side should have been peddling in conspiracy theories to begin with, including the one Ian Bremmer is peddling here that Beijing bungled the initial outbreak. The best plan going forward is to work together combining our strengths to overcome the crisis rather than to undermine each other.
    2
  473.  @metrolights891  Yeah, I know.
    2
  474.  @deschan2246  Go ahead and believe that.
    2
  475.  helena russel  The U.S. is not a shithole. Admittedly it's not paradise, but by and large it's a good place to be.
    2
  476. China's actions in Hong Kong up to this point suggest that they are actively trying to avoid war.
    2
  477. But of course, this is France.
    2
  478.  @saroshi9809  I always thought you could fill a freighter with cheap drones especially if they have sufficient AI to not require a pilot. I've wondered recently though if this isn't old technology. I mean what's the practical difference between a suicide drone and a missile?
    2
  479. That reality is why China is stopping the practice.
    2
  480.    Aircraft carriers can be very effective in some situations. Most of America's foes are not China and being able to bring that kind of air power near the coast of any other country is a huge benefit. Carriers are good for policing and protecting trade routes and they are great for diplomatic posturing. The degree to which they would be an asset or liability in this particular scenario is not known, because it has not been tested. The loss of the Japanese carriers in WWII was the beginning of the end of the Japanese navy. Once air superiority was established ground support and logistics protection were greatly enhanced by the presence of American flattops. Of course now the question of vulnerability to anti-ship missiles comes in to play. The Chinese PLAN has been pouring boatloads of research and investment into the development of Carrier-killer missiles while the United States has been developing counter-measures in response. Also, at some point somebodies going to develop a much smaller carrier filled with squadrons of drones to engage the ships and aircraft of the other side. These may be a lot cheaper and may put a much smaller contingent of sailors and naval aviators at risk in what would otherwise be carrier operations. It may be that tomorrow's battle carrier looks more like a toy shop.
    2
  481.  Elevated Status  No one outside of the Western hemisphere has the capacity to attack U.S. soil unless you're referring to a nuclear attack. Frankly, it's not going to happen. Americans don't love war, but we hate looking weak, and that combined with a belief that only democratic countries have their people's interests at heart as well as our possession of the world's strongest military sometimes leads us to decisions that history kind of frowns on. Americans love the people of the world so long as they're not trying to enter through our southern border (argument for a different thread), and what we do we do out of love, admittedly a sick and twisted love, but love none-the-less. In the movie "Caddyshack" the judge played by Ted Knight told Danny that "I've sent younger boys than you to the gas chamber; but it was for their own good." There's a bit of a Judge Smails vibe running through the American psyche, especially regarding foreign policy.
    2
  482. I don't think he was being serious. He's commenting that mainstream media looks at any issue no matter how ethically obvious, gives it a false equivalency, and then concentrates on the fight tactics rather than the issue itself.
    2
  483.  @tmyofficial1080  It could be if, and only if, China were okay with that.
    2
  484.  @Gguzicki  I think it was a PR stunt. If anything we should have fewer branches of service. There was no good reason to elevate the Army Air Corp into the Air Force, it just complicated the command chain and created a branch of service with no consideration of casualties. This creation of a "Space Force" is even worse. The orbital military assets and strategy should be determined by the needs of the Army and Navy and they should be controlled by those branches.
    2
  485. Yeah, I choked on that too, and I'm a Biden supporter.
    2
  486.  @123-h5i5y  I don't think Biden looks across the Pacific much. His diplomatic heart is in Europe. He leaves Asia to his underlings and they are all old Cold Warriors who hate the idea that China could be successful and some are willing to sacrifice people in the hopes that it can make China fail.
    2
  487. The decision hasn't been made yet (8/11 15:21 PDT)
    2
  488. Let's be honest, Hong Kong should have never been part of the British Empire in the first place.
    2
  489. Don't judge a book by its cover. China's architecture is traditionally walled. This includes all schools and many factories. What you don't see in China is a lot of chain-link fencing, which is what most facilities in the United States use for security, including most schools and factories. Haven't been down under, can't speak on their behalf.
    2
  490. "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."—Lyndon Johnson
    2
  491.  @kuroneko3585  They would best be protected by being loyal citizens to the existing states in which they live and work.
    2
  492.  @dantankunfiveancestorsfist  I think there are probably many Ukrainians who want exactly what you are saying. They want the war to end so that they can get back to their lives. I strongly suspect though that there are many others who are justifiably furious with the Russians regarding lost territory and invasion, and they are willing to fight to the death to drive the Russians out. From what I understand there are also Ukrainians who are happy to see the Russians come in and support them against the ultranationalists, especially in the east. I think the United States, and to a slightly lesser extent our allies, are supporting anti-Russian sentiments in Ukraine not for the benefit of the Ukrainian people, but to expand our influence in Eastern Europe at the intentional expense of the Russians. The Russians are pushing back against this. And because both of us are too chicken-shit to face each other directly, we're using Ukraine as a chess board at the great expense of the people of Ukraine, regardless of their point of view. Or perhaps I'm just jaded.
    2
  493.  @Sarefsx  Well, it would depend on who replaced him, but I think most Russians likely to do so would be just as determined to defend Russia's position in the world as he is.
    2
  494. I'm not sure that's the case. A lot of countries are not going to want to get involved. China is developing deep commercial ties all over the globe and the United States hasn't proven to be a reliable friend lately.
    2
  495.  @electrogestapo  My point is that a lot of these countries may not choose to see China as their enemy.
    2
  496.  @electrogestapo  First of all, yes, by a war I am referring to belligerents in combat. Anything short of that is diplomacy. China has complicated relationships with varying countries. The only countries that are actively trying to sabotage China's progress right now are the United States and Australia, and I wouldn't even call them enemies at this stage. We still have too many common interests, too many deep connections, and too many people who aren't interested in mutual suffering. We're more like dirty cheating rivals. If war broke out that could all change. China might find countries lining up against them. I think the U.S. might be surprised though by how few countries, especially local countries, throw their lot in against China. China's unlikely to be destroyed in the war and even if they are unable to take Taiwan they're still going to be the dominant player in their region, only now they'll be angry and vindictive. Countries realize this and they have to look at their bigger picture. I'm sorry you don't care for my use of metaphors. Sometimes I like to add a little color to this otherwise dry debate. I hardly think it indicates lack of intelligence. Your criticism of it is fine—different strokes and all. But your vitriolic approach indicates a disconcerting lack of self-control. I hope at some point you grow out of that.
    2
  497. Ooooh, you get down with your jingoist self!
    2
  498.  @LocalBloodAngelEnjoyer  I'm not so sure. I think American soldiers are as good as any in the world, but I'm pretty sure that the Chinese soldiers are perfectly competent as well.
    2
  499.  @jakegold5495  The Russians and the Chinese both have strong economic relationships with both countries but they don't seem to be quite as involved. I think these other countries' support would be the third question. First which side does the U.S. end up on? Second, Where do Iran and Egypt end up in this conflict? Third, how about China, Russia, Europe, and Turkey? And fourth, how about the rest of the world?
    2
  500.  @jakegold5495  It would be really interesting to see how the cookies crumbled. It's hard to guess because they both have the same allies and adversaries.
    2
  501.  @CedarHunt  You're confusing war with occupation.
    2
  502. I believe that the majority of people who voted for him at least in the general election were not anti-establishment advocates but rather rank-and-file Republicans who were not voting for Trump per se but were voting for the candidate they thought most likely to carry out the Republican agenda and also for the opportunity to steal a Supreme Court seat. These folks have no loyalty for him personally but would be loathe to support a Democrat in any circumstance, even against him.
    2
  503. "I find it interesting that people dont think its possible that both the USA and China do evil things." I would find it interesting that people don't think it's obvious that both the USA and China do evil things. Big countries—big problems. Sometimes the attempted solutions to those problems are problematic in themselves. That being said, both countries are beautiful, filled mostly with wonderful people—even in their governments.
    2
  504.  @Paul-ft9dn  Yeah, there is a lot of bias, including my own. I don't want to believe these accusations, and I'm sure that that is a big reason for my skepticism. I think in this forum and on this channel the predominate bias is anti-China and I think that most folks here very much want to believe the claims, and so they do.
    2
  505.  @toby2581  You consider basic human decency to be a platitude. Why am I not surprised?
    2
  506. Things are not so black and white.
    2
  507. Just 'cuz you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
    2
  508. Don't hold your breath.
    2
  509. While I agree with your overall assessment, his position is the right one for a military strategist. He has to assume the worst, and he has to try to figure out how best to defend against it, regardless of its likelihood. His scenario at the end shows a proper understanding. He has a good grasp on what China would do if it chose to take Taiwan now, but he says it would be a miscalculation. I'm pretty sure the Chinese have a similar assessment, which is why you won't see it happen. But it theoretically could, and our military high command needs to be ready just in case.
    2
  510.  stephen glover  Lack of transparency is not proof of conspiracy. Many of the people in this comment section seem not to understand this.
    2
  511. The original question was "So why not allow people the means to protect themselves[?]" To which I answered, "Because when people abuse the right allowing such means other people die." Killing somebody with a firearm in the commission of a crime is an abuse of the uninfringeable right to bare arms. The fact that our current laws infringe upon that right is another matter. The best reason not to allow firearms as a means of self protection is because ubiquitous, easy-to-execute lethality is dangerous in a community. The best reason to allow it is because our primary legal document prohibits its restriction.
    2
  512. I feel for the people of Ukraine watching their country being shamelessly torn apart by Great Power politics. 2022 I feel for the people of Serbia watching their country being shamelessly torn apart by Great Power politics. 2013 I feel for the people of Sudan watching their country being shamelessly torn apart by Great Power politics. 2011 I feel for the people of Georgia watching their country being shamelessly torn apart by Great Power politics. 2008 I feel for the people of Indonesia watching their country being shamelessly torn apart by Great Power politics. 2002 I feel for the people of Yugoslavia watching their country being shamelessly torn apart by Great Power politics. 1992 I feel for the people of the Soviet Union watching their country being shamelessly torn apart by Great Power politics. 1990 It's so tragic the way we all back these various rebels so that we can tear apart weak countries in order to score points against each other in the global game. The people who have to live in these pawn-shaped states suffer so.
    2
  513. Westerners are becoming more and more prone to naval gazing. We describe ourselves as the world and dismiss everyone that doesn't recognize us as that. Most of the actual world isn't interested in siding with "the world" against China. If we boycott the Olympics, the rest of the world will shake its collective head and go compete. Because it's the winter Olympics whose sports are dominated by rich countries, it may have a little bit more of an effect than if it were a summer games, but the real loser won't be China. It will be the Olympics themselves, at exactly the moment that the Olympics need to succeed. As for the microchips, Ian's right. China isn't going to war over microchips. China will pour massive investment into chip technology and in five to ten years they'll be producing chips that are competitive with the best in the world.
    2
  514.  That One  "Supposedly the reason it’s illegal is because it’s a possible gateway to human trafficking." unlike the porn industry?
    2
  515. I think we should have four or five of 'em sitting on a long couch on stage and having a calm conversation about the needs and the future of the country. Do it in San Diego and call it Demi-Con. Ticket sales could be distributed equally to the campaign funds of the candidates that showed up.
    2
  516.  @kaybee65  "Mongolia is not part of PRC claim…" yet.
    2
  517.  @ayi3455  While Imperial China began with the Xihuangdi and the Qin unification, China itself goes back much further, at the very least to the Spring and Autumn period which was the age of philosophy in China. Likewise the Roman state predated the empire by a couple centuries, but this is all nit-picking. It's obvious you know your history and I can admire that.
    2
  518.  @ayi3455  The kingdoms of the Spring and Autumn Period were considerably larger (area-wise) than modern provinces, as were most of the kingdoms in the Warring States Period. The territory of the Western Zhou was also larger than modern provinces and at that time the dynasty had considerable control over its territory.
    2
  519.  @mingkao1  ROC and PRC are different governments for the same country. Neither are nations. The Chinese Civil War never officially ended, it just became impractical to prosecute for either side.
    2
  520. It should definitely be called out when it's seen, but it shouldn't be casually correlated with other uncontrollable aspects of people, like suggesting that people are racist because they're rural or southern. Now if they're supporting Trump then they are either racist or racism-tolerant, but of course that's an active decision.
    2
  521. Well-regulated is a reference to militias in a separate clause that linguistically places no conditions on the right to bare arms. The second amendment is insanely (and I mean that literally) broad. If it's taken at face value than the U.S. government cannot restrict in any way the possession and carrying of firearms, or any other arms for that matter, by any person. This is not the way we interpret the second amendment because, as I mentioned earlier, that would be insane. We've chosen to assume, contrary to the text, that only certain people are allowed to bare certain weapons under certain circumstances. We've done this both to limit actual gun violence casualties as well as to make people who are uncomfortable being constantly in the presence of people with questionable motives or stability and easily executable lethal force less nervous. Of course the amendment language is likely never to change while the United States remains intact so we'll just have to continue to chose between the options of death or delusion.
    2
  522.  @dougquan8025  There is precedent for it. After the Civil War those who advocated for or participated in the insurrection were banned from elected office for life.
    2
  523.  @jestersjokers  Biden scares me. He looks a lot like Kerry. I'll support him if he gets the nod but now that Pete's out and Amy's not really looking viable, I think it's time to get behind Bernie.
    2
  524.  Ching Ching  No argument there. By the same logic, without Guangzhou Hong Kong is nothing.
    2
  525. Don't drag the thinking half of the country into your throwback proclamation. I sure as hell don't want a bunch of masked vandals coming here and making it difficult to work and interact with the Chinese in the future.
    2
  526. "China is admitting that something is happening…". Really? Everyone in China knows exactly what's happening. Whole cities are shut down, people are being warned of the dangers related to the Coronavirus, told to report to hospital if they have symptoms, and instructed on how to avoid catching the disease, and travel is being greatly curtailed. While it's fair to say there may not have been a fast enough response to the first signs of the epidemic, that is not the kind of thing that is peculiar to China. In fact, it's just as likely to be the case in any country where an airborne virus gets out of hand. What should be acknowledged is the massive mobilization of resources levied against the epidemic by the Chinese government and its heroic medical professionals since the nature of the problem became clear. If you want to attack China for mistakes made at the onset of the epidemic, do so after the danger has passed. Right now China needs the support of the world in battling this disease and the world needs cooperation from China to keep it from affecting the rest of the globe to the same degree that it's affected Wuhan. As for people who may have been questionably quarantined, that can be investigated once the epidemic is under control.
    2
  527.  @LazyDrug-nz1cf  Western accounts of what occurred in Syria in the last decade proved extremely inaccurate. It's curious that people don't remember this. I don't know that anybody's numbers can be trusted. Both sides have reasons for cooking the books. I tend to trust the Russian numbers over the Ukrainian numbers, but I also am slightly more sympathetic to the Russian side.
    2
  528. Most people don't remember much history. Westerners doubly so if it didn't happen in Europe or America.
    2
  529.  @vornamenachname1069  We're not an imperialistic empire (which is redundant), we're an ideological empire. We don't want your land or your people; we only want your adherence to doctrine.
    2
  530. Hi Lula! Good luck on your campaign.
    2
  531. Apples and oranges my friend.
    2
  532.  @Harthorn  You grossly overestimate the power of Democrats. As soon as we acquire the numbers to actually accomplish something we immediately splinter off into factions and fight over whether or not our proposals are pure enough or practical. If authoritarianism ever becomes a thing in the United States, it's not going to come from the Democrats, at least not initially.
    2
  533. Dropping a plane from a carrier deck is the president's fault?
    2
  534.  @MrFlatage  That buck should have stopped well below the presidential level. Honestly, this is an expected periodic consequence of regular training. While the cost of this aircraft and the sensitivity of the tech on it should trigger an investigation, I don't know that anyone should be held to account for this. After all, you don't want carrier captains to be reluctant to conduct training exercises or show-of-force aerial operations.
    2
  535.  @MrFlatage  I'm American, and you're obnoxious. Have a good day.
    2
  536.  @MrFlatage  I wasn't going to respond to you again but I'm a sucker. I'm not going to discuss most of your diatribe but I am curious about one thing. You say that I "…cannot offer proof to [my] own words and claims." I haven't stated any facts or anything claiming to be facts. What exactly are you expecting me to prove?
    2
  537. I think Cenk's suggestion on how to deal with China has been in effect since 1989. We just don't advertise it. I think we treat China and Russia like that along with any other country that's not on our BFF list and in fairness, I think they do the same thing to us. I think an unusually successful foray into this activity by the Russians had an oversized influence in our last presidential election.
    2
  538.  @condorX2  It looks like there is a definite generational divide.
    2
  539. Man the comment section here is something else. You guys have more hubris than we Americans do, and you got a lot less to back it up.
    2
  540.  @jakelloyd8440  Who's denying the Holocaust? I never said such a thing. I'm denying that there is credible evidence for what's being alleged in Xinjiang. That may change as time goes on, but right now it's not the case. As for the Holocaust, I'm sure it occurred. It was every bit as horrific as it is portrayed. It cost the lives of six million Jews (the vast majority of victims), Roma, Communists and other targeted groups. No denial here.
    2
  541. Just out of curiosity, what would it take to convince you otherwise?
    2
  542. You think he isn't?
    2
  543. Hardly detailed, but I suspect that Putin wants very much to see how much pressure the winter puts on Ukraine and her allies before risking large numbers of Russian youth. It's a patient approach, something that's always worked well for the Russians, but like Alexander said, the optics are terrible.
    2
  544. They need to design them so that they can dock at a port facility and get loaded and off-loaded by a crane.
    2
  545. Taiwan is more like a body part.
    2
  546. When Americans gather to protest in the street for whatever reason do Iranians think that we're rising up to overthrow our government?
    2
  547.  @happyhappynuts  "Can we say Manchuria is Japanese just because they held it for a period?" You could if they still held it. That's why we can say that Hawaii is American (or any of the rest of America for that matter).
    2
  548.  @condorX2  That's exactly what China Uncensored is. Their goal is to destroy the Chinese government.
    2
  549.  @pads6367  Yeah, I don't know either. I wonder if any inflation in Russia is due to public reaction to the news that they've been sanctioned or if it is due to actual product scarcity of some product that I can't think of. I've heard that the Russian ruble has "collapsed" but I wonder if it's buying power within Russia has fallen significantly.
    2
  550.  @doujinflip  China relies on imports for fuel, but not for food.
    2
  551. No disrespect intended, but Russia is unreliable. I'm not saying this to crap on Russia. It's just that their interests are complicated.
    2
  552. That's yet to be seen. Either way it's the greatest environmental recovery action ever taken.
    2
  553. That's the power of an executive order. Besides, gay couples aren't a health risk to the employees and patrons of that business.
    2
  554. But the argument isn't about Utopia, it's about whether or not the enlightenment is the primary engine of progress and morality. Pinker and people of his mindset credit the enlightenment with appreciation of reason, which to a large extent it was, but it wasn't the first instance of it. The enlightenment did play a role in Western progress, but there were much stronger factors in Western world dominance. Narrowness of the Atlantic gave Europe access to rich lands peopled with stone-aged cultures and extreme vulnerability to disease. The ability of some European kingdoms to rape those lands incentivized other Europeans to target the supply lines for plunder, and eventually to take part in the direct exploitation of those lands and peoples directly. This dynamic, along with the Protestant reformation and the Catholic response to it, motivated weapons development at a much higher rate than anywhere else in the world. The enlightened British, Dutch, French, and Americans were all slave-holding societies who created racist and exploitative colonial empires, as did the less enlightenment-associated Russians. They all created two-tier empires based on a ruling nation-state that promoted enlightenment philosophy among those within the privileged nationality but exploited all the imperial subjects outside of it, often using a divide and rule strategy. The fate of less nationalistic empires: Chinese, Persian, and Ottoman, lost ground not because they were unattached to enlightenment philosophy, but because the industrial revolution occurred outside their realms, and because their military investment wasn't fueled by African slaves and American gold. Is the industrial revolution a child of the enlightenment? I would argue that to some degree it is. The scientific method is, and that is not insignificant, but good science had been taking place long before. And even the scientific method can be stifling if it's made into an exclusive dogma. Investment in research possible because of the fruits of exploitation, the need to compete against fellow exploiters, and the development of an economic class of men with time and personal fortunes built on exploitation created the environment that produced the harnessing of steam.
    2
  555. Most of China's consumers are in China.
    2
  556.  @DOWNUNDER.  If that were true then they wouldn't put out so many Chinese hit pieces.
    2
  557.  Follower of Christ777  Trump is everyone's enemy, even those who think he's their hero.
    2
  558.  @valorwarrior7628  I was wondering how the Xuanfeng catapults might have played into it. I think they were much more mobile than any comparable Roman catapult and I would think they could have been effective against heavy infantry formations.
    2
  559.  @SepulchureValen  I'm sure the Romans would adapt against anything they came across. I see no reason though to assume that the Chinese wouldn't adapt as well.
    2
  560.  @kek6969-w9y  You do realize that the Mongol armies of Batu Khan wiped out the combined armies of Europe at the Battle of Liegnitz in 1241, right?
    2
  561.  @trollet9686  Looking into this it appears that I was wrong. My apologies.
    2
  562.  @oceanwave4502  No one has to die. An aging society will require a new method of resource distribution. With technology being what it is and will be, labor shortage will not be an issue, but increased profits from lower labor costs realized by firms will have to be redirected into pensions to relieve the pressure of providing for the elderly from the working generations. Governments are going to have to increase their part in supporting retirees and their going to have to do that through corporate taxation. What can get in the way is corporate flight to more liberal countries that care more about attracting business than they do about providing for people. As for the racial conflicts being stoked up by white nationalists and their enablers in the west, while they are horrendous and unconscionable, they're not really that much of a threat to our existence, merely a stain on our humanity.
    2
  563. It's a damned good thing the room was pre-measured.
    2
  564. Your suggestion that the State's cities aren't "real" places is insulting. Let's try to do right by all of us, okay?
    2
  565. Kevin, everything you said about the Chinese navy is true, but much of it applies to the U.S. navy as well. The USN, the most powerful maritime unit in human history, is itself untested. The combat that it has participated in since 1945 has been against adversaries with no ability to challenge the sheer mass of firepower and defense that the USN presents. None of the current leadership in the navy was around when their was any kind of equity in combat capability and sailors had to be motivated to fight in battles that could very well end up with all hands lost. And even if they were, the game has changed so much since then that, except for the raw grit, the experience would be of limited value. As to your numbered points, I don't know how training compares. I know the Chinese were very concerned about the training that their airmen were receiving after a dismal set of wargames about half a decade ago, but I believe that they are attempting to address that; I do not know how successful they have been with that. I think China's technology is very close to on par with the United States and will probably exceed it sometime in the next decade. I think the U.S. has a very slight edge on proven leadership which I explained above, and I think the tactics advantage is undeterminable because effective tactics for fighting a peer competitor in this day and age are completely untested. There are two other considerations, the first of which is location, if the fighting is off the coast of China or Taiwan then China will have a lot more other assets to bare from land locations. Likewise, if it were off the coast of the United States or say, Cuba, the U.S. would have an overwhelming tactical advantage. The second is industrial capacity, which only really plays out in a long conflict. I think China holds a substantial advantage there, though that could be mitigated if the U.S. were able to successfully attack enough of China's factories.
    2
  566. …so realistic.
    2
  567. The US military is definitely stronger than the Chinese military, especially when it comes to manned aircraft. If the two militaries squared off in a neutral location equally suppliable by both countries then the USA would have a very real advantage, especially in the short term. This is not likely to occur though. Also, assumptions that US equipment is of a substantially higher quality is probably not consistently accurate. Both countries have strengths relative to each other in different areas because their militaries have different priorities. The US priority is to police the world; the Chinese priority is control of their immediate vicinity. Because of this, any likely conflict would occur in China-friendly terrain, which is a substantial equalizer. And then there's the American advantage that comes with a mature alliance structure. Both countries are extremely powerful, and neither can take a military victory for granted.
    2
  568.  @kathleencove  Not my experience in New York.
    2
  569. Frankly I don't see much of a similarity.
    2
  570. The strategic argument, though valid, is not the dominant argument. This has much more to do with Chinese self-respect, and no argument short of an absolute curb-stomping is going to make any impression on the Chinese.
    2
  571. To the contrary—the terms aren't even opposite. Conservative means appreciative of traditional institutions while liberal means allowed to function with little or no government interference. We've twisted the terms to the point of absurdity in the United States. The dichotomy was established in British politics where old-money conservatives (the manor-born aristocracy) competed with new-money liberals (industrialists) for power in parliament in the nineteenth century.
    2
  572.  @k101_  There's a substantial difference of scale between rockets going into low Earth orbit and those headed for the moon. In the long run we'll get those reusable systems but in the shorter term we need to optimize the systems we have and understand.
    2
  573. When it comes to stoking internal disruptions, the Russians are in good company.
    2
  574.  @paulghencea9037  You can't make three quarters of a billion dollars. Nobody's that productive.
    2
  575.  @outman6207  When was the first edition published? Oh yeah, 2001.
    2
  576. Memories of Libya?
    2
  577.  @LokiOdinssnn  You missed my point.
    2
  578.  @leethal59  At some point Hong Kong is going to become the Banking District of Shenzhen. Once the One Country-Two Systems policy sunsets then Hong Kong can properly integrate and the people of Hong Kong won't be trapped in their little enclave.
    2
  579.  @manleung8926  The conditions for this mess were caused by the British taking the territory in the first place and also by trying to impose policy for fifty years after their absence and by China for assuming that China and Hong Kong would both be better off with the city gradually transitioning into the rest of the country.
    2
  580.  @Kermit_T_Frog  Capitalism is efficient in large part because it so effectively harnesses avarice and fear. Unchecked, it leads to ruinous exploitation, which is why regulation is so important if you don't want a society where most people live in misery. Socialism is the best tool for creating a society where the most people can have a decent life. However, if it eliminates positive incentives for ambition completely then the inefficiencies will lead to a societal malaise that stymies progress and makes a society uncompetitive regarding its more liberal competitors. There has to be a balance, and right now the United States is out of balance.
    2
  581. Free and democratic are not the same thing.
    2
  582. I'm sure Ms. Lin is a bright young woman, but I don't think she understands the Chinese people at all. I got the strong feeling she belongs to a dissident family—if that's not the case I apologize for the assumption—and that her opinions were incubated by that personal animosity and nurtured by western blame-oriented anti-China propaganda. The Chinese people are currently enjoying the best lives that they've had since at least the early nineteenth century. Their living standards are the best they've been in history and their status in the world is as high as it's been at any time since the beginning of the industrial revolution. Chinese people have more personal freedom, including including the right to complain, then ever before. And while they don't get to elect their leaders, they can at least respect their leaders, who, contrary to some other obvious examples, can rise up to the occasion during a crisis and keep the country together and moving in the right direction. The people of China are happy with their government because they know that the government values, nurtures, and protects the Chinese people. And those who say they are against the CCP but not against the Chinese people, I say that they do not know the Chinese people.
    2
  583. It's not just billionaires—it's anyone with disposable income and a distaste for government.
    2
  584.  @cocochanel6495  There are consequences regardless. An army that doesn't follow orders is an armed and undisciplined mob. Professionalism is key not just to mission success, but to the survival of the country. What's most important is that the leaders issuing the orders are doing so responsibly. There is one check on the leadership in the U.S. military. The oath each soldier and officer takes is to defend the Constitution. That's why someone like Trump couldn't order the Army to keep him in power after he lost the election. It's not as helpful though when it comes to inadvisable orders overseas. If it doesn't contradict the U.S. Constitution then the order has to be obeyed.
    2
  585.  @abhijithks3035  I think it was probably a good decision to lock down the country to stop the spread and I commend Prime Minister Modi (despite the fact that I detest his politics) for attempting to take a responsible approach. What's doubly tragic is that where many in the west are too self-empowered to follow the path needed to fight this, so many in India and other countries, in which so many live hand-to-mouth and government services and infrastructure are underdeveloped, are simply unable to follow the directives of their health authorities even when their governments make the right call. It's not just India. I'm sad to predict that this virus is going to tear through the tropics like a hurricane. After this thing is done I hope we can understand how important it is to eliminate the global poverty both for individuals and for states. We have to make sure that the next time something like this happens that everyone in the world can survive the policies necessary to fight the plague.
    2
  586.  @agris8859  How the world works anymore depends on how the power wielders behave. You may support a view on how the world should work, but those who disagree have a say in it as well.
    2
  587. Okay, I really like the idea behind this, and I've suggested it myself. But how do we keep those who need a lot more time to master a subject (or several subjects) able to complete their secondary education before they reach adulthood? How do we keep colleges from discriminating against the students who finish their math requirements at age twenty-one, versus those who got it taken care of by age seventeen? Are we as a society going to fund someone who spends seven years in high school? Are we going to provide childcare while they finish mastering their English requirements or their Biology requisites? Do these students get to continue with advanced courses if it took them three years to master the basic ones? I know that our current system has similar, and in some cases worse, failings. I'm not suggesting that this isn't a better approach. I actually think it is. But in order to put it into effect, we're going to require a system overhaul and a radical adjustment in our expectations. Are we prepared to do that?
    2
  588.  @obsoletelobster9258  Every strong successful country has a long history of meddling with and spying on and copying other countries tech.
    2
  589. Since we're talking about books, I just finished Klaus Mühlhahn's book "Making China Modern: From the Great Qing to Xi Jinpeng" which I had been told was the most authoritative book on modern China since Jonathon Spence's "The Search for Modern China". It had a lot of good information in it, but still it's portrayal of China followed the tired narrative that while Chinese progress to this point has been impressive, if they don't move closer to liberal democracy than what they have is unsustainable. There's a part of my that just wonders how much do these China experts have to see before they start to believe what's in front of their eyes. The best book that I have seen written on China (and I have to admit that I'm monolingual so I can't read what the Chinese themselves are writing) is Henry Kissinger's "On China". Whether you love or hate Kissinger, and I'm well aware of his controversial past, the man understands China like few Westerners do.
    2
  590.  @charlesdoesstuff7379  I beg to differ about nobody having issues with Chinese sovereignty. If that was the case then the rest of the world would be encouraging Taiwan to negotiate their incorporation into the PRC, and nobody would have been sending political and material support to the Hong Kong separatists a few years ago. That being said, Chinese claims in the South China Sea are, shall we say, ambitious, regardless of whether or not they go back hundreds of years. The South China Sea claims are something that China needs to work out with the other claimants. I think it's perfectly all right to back other countries in their claims and try to make sure that they have some capacity to resist Chinese intimidation, but ultimately there has to be an agreement that doesn't entirely dismiss China's strength and China's history. The rules that everyone is accusing China of breaking are rules that were put in place when China was weak and without their consultation. This includes the territorial waters definitions and the McMahon line in the Himalayas. China acknowledges the rules that it benefits from and it constantly tests the rules that it doesn't like. It will continue to do this, because that is what is in China's best interest. The power dance between China pushing for a new world order and the United States defending the status quo is to be expected. I think that it's really unlikely to erupt into anything serious though. China is very adept at compartmentalizing its issues. It has pretty good relations with all of its neighbors along the South China Sea despite the territorial disagreements. China even takes advantage of the complicated relationship it has with India, they fight and yet they stay engaged, kind of like a difficult marriage. Taiwan's a different story. China will go to the mat on that one.
    2
  591.  @mtksbctk  CNA's treatment of China is slightly on the friendly side, but considering how the rest of the world portrays China, it's a breath of fresh air.
    2
  592. There probably is something, but whether there is or not, they're not going to get a fare description from the Western commentariat and they know that.
    2
  593.  @krayzeeantix1439  And how did you determine this exceptionally keen analysis?
    2
  594.  @Quazgarion  Occupation of Russia would require a truly global effort. No country, and no likely coalition of countries, could take and hold Russia. However, if there was a military contest in eastern Siberia and the rest of the world didn't get involved, I think China could take and hold large areas, particularly in the south. Having said that, none of this is going to happen anytime soon.
    2
  595. 13:15 if the Chinese people believed that Taiwan could be taken in a day then the pressure for the government to finish the civil war would be overwhelming. The Chinese people know that it will be a difficult achievement, but they also believe that it is a fundamental necessity. I agree with your assessment that taking Taiwan will be hard, in fact, I would probably use stronger language. But it will happen as soon as China believes that they can win with certainty, probably before 2049. Also, the only thing that China really values in Taiwan is its Chineseness. All else is subject to sacrifice.
    2
  596. Of course he's not looking to secure the Democracy and Independent freedom of Taiwan. He recognizes that as suicidal. In the long run, he's probably right.
    2
  597. That's because white America hasn't had to fight it to get by.
    2
  598. Believed by whom? Oh yeah, believed by people who want to believe the worst of China.
    2
  599.  @exactlybasically8603  Y'know I've thought of that. Wouldn't it be cool just to have a massive war game where you pit two countries' forces against each other in a series of non-lethal battles. I'd definitely be willing to pay to watch the highlights. I don't think it would fly because everyone has too many secrets. But it would be soooooo cool.
    2
  600.  @Andy-P  That's kind of what disputed borders are, two countries decide that a piece of territory is theirs and then they use the resources at their disposal to control that territory, or at least to keep their rival from controlling that territory. That can include their own military resources, or the military resources of a sympathetic ally, or diplomatic resources. As for the United States being able to destroy ships at 2000km or greater distance from shore, that means that ship defenses on both sides are likely to be tested in a U.S.-China conflict, and even more so as aerial and aquatic (and even submersible) drones take an ever larger combat role.
    2
  601.  @litchi4507  Hong Kong isn't a Chinese territory, it's a Chinese city—with a complicated history.
    2
  602.  Dark of the knight  Over the last decade (and more) the CCP has proven itself to be much more of a solution than a problem.
    2
  603.  @angphilipian3921  There's no credible evidence that China is engaged in ethnic cleansing. Of course, you believe what you want to believe.
    2
  604.  @8964Louis  My understanding is that kidnapping is a capital offense in China.
    2
  605. I don't agree that Hong Kong was on the verge of collapse, but I do agree that the security law needed to happen. It is draconian, but really, the protesters made a less draconian law impossible.
    2
  606. @ Cathryn Mataga, I think most policy makers in the United States realize that time is on China's side. The longer the United States chooses not to engage with China, the more likely China will succeed in a conflict between the two powers in the Western Pacific. Eventually China will reincorporate Taiwan regardless, but I suspect some in the United States believe that China can be turned back now if they can be goaded into a conflict. Donald Trump said as much at one point. To paraphrase, he said why not attack China now while we can still win?
    2
  607.  @howdypartner4818  Bernie Sanders supporters can be independents. They can also be Democrats or third party members. You'd probably have to look really hard to find one who's a Republican.
    2
  608.  @howdypartner4818  He didn't win any states in the general election because he wasn't running. He won several in the Democratic Primaries and he probably did have spoiler votes from Republicans in states with open primaries. I don't think I'd call them supporters though, just bomb-throwers. The vast majority of those who voted for him were legit though and I strongly suspect that those who did vote for him because they wanted him to be President were either Democrats, third-party members or independents.
    2
  609. I couldn't agree with you more. The biggest problem this country has is that the voting electorate is lazy, stupid and/or corrupted. This is actually exacerbated by transparency which although it is effective at exposing the worst shenanigans in government nonetheless makes makes elected officials unable to work together to solve real problems. Everyone is afraid of losing support of the insanity wing of their constituencies and this is not an unfounded fear. The reason why the former Speaker of the House didn't enunciate these truths when he was Speaker is because any Congressman willing to do that would not be able to become Speaker in the first place.
    2
  610. You guys aren't part of the solution; you're part of the problem.
    2
  611.  @Jumptohistory  "But I don't think your argument is going to stop the world from sympathizing the Taiwanese." The "world", or at least the more meddlesome parts of it, will sympathize with Taiwan the same way they sympathize with Tibet and Xinjiang, with essentially the same results. China will be annoyed but not the least bit deterred.
    2
  612.  ilgamesh  One billion Chinese see it as a civil war. To them this is unfinished business, and a scar on their soul. That's not going to change until Taiwan is back under the control of the central government.
    2
  613. It doesn't matter who benefits. If the machines are switching votes then that needs to be fixed.
    2
  614. I seriously doubt the Chinese will send out into the open ocean alone.
    2
  615.  @KashiARTW  It's disturbing how many people are ignoring the power dynamics of this situation. Within a decade China will have the necessary power to confidently reclaim Taiwan. By 2049 at the latest this will be accomplished regardless of what the people currently living in Taiwan want. The vast majority of Taiwan residents have ancestral homes on the mainland. If they create a fuss during, after, and in some cases even before repatriation, then they'll probably be sent back to those villages. It is in the best interest of the people of Taiwan, especially if they want to maintain any of their differences, to negotiate with the mainland to preserve some of their cultural and/or political eccentricities after a peaceful reunification. Otherwise, they're going to loose everything.
    2
  616. So what does the new law say?
    2
  617. If he was working for the NED instead of the people of Cambodia then the arrest may be warranted.
    2
  618.  @gtpacs3395  from Massachusetts
    2
  619. What's happening in Virginia is not going to start a revolution here.
    2
  620.  @BrianFullerPDX1  Perhaps I'm behind on my terminology, but assuming that the United States has always been a constitutional democracy, what with our democracy being defined in our Constitution, we functioned as such with legalized chattel slavery for eighty-four years and with authority over American Indians unable to attain citizenship based on race for a hundred and forty. Human rights isn't about the system of government; it's about the respect authority has over the people it governs. Any system can be humane, just as any system can be horrendous. The idea that democracy, constitutional or otherwise, is the humane system is the result of effective propaganda and long term institutional ideological education.
    2
  621. Actually, this is the lead up to rice being grown on the moon.
    2
  622. 4:48 "…The zero COVID policy of Xi Jinping does not work, there's virtually no one in China that's gotten COVID…" Think about it.
    2
  623. From your keyboard to God's monitor.
    2
  624. You guys understand this is a roast, right? This is what the correspondence dinner is. If you can't take a joke, do like Trump and don't show up.
    2
  625.  @tinafoster8665  The government of the United States, though not without serious faults, is far from the most corrupt institution the world has ever seen. I don't think it's in the top fifty of the most corrupt governments the world sees right now. But not to defend the U.S. government too much, you're absolutely correct that the failing state of U.S. infrastructure including the I-35W bridge is due to miserly short-sidedness of our elected officials, mostly from one party (I won't tell you which but it's the one that wants the government to shrink so small that they can drown it in a bathtub). I'm not critical of China's infrastructure investment. I'm excited to see the rebuilding of overland trade routes across Asia and Africa that have been so sadly neglected during the centuries of European dominance and colonialism. I'm also excited to see new technology like maglev trains which I saw but sadly didn't get to ride in Beijing last year. I did get to ride a high-speed train from Deyang to Chengdu, a distance roughly equal that between Portland and Seattle. It took 45 minutes and that was with a stop in the middle, pretty cool. Whether China can maintain the infrastructure in the future that they are building now will depend on a number of things. I do think that the Chinese government, at least at this point, has the necessary vision and resources to make a good faith effort towards maintenance, but there still is a lot of corruption at the local government level and certainly with many of the companies that the government works with in construction and maintenance. As for cars, your arguments are impeccable, but it's hard to wean people off that level of convenience or to tell folks who are entering the middle classes in developing countries that they don't get to have the things that those in developed countries take for granted. I agree with your "should", I'm not sure there's going to be a corresponding "will" to the greater detriment of the world.
    2
  626.  @tinafoster8665  No problem. More than anything I was just sad for those that were on it when it collapsed… and a bit angry that those responsible for its maintenance had let it get to the point where it could collapse.
    2
  627.  @tinafoster8665  Thank you very much. It's been a pleasure. Have a great day.
    2
  628. 7:08 Actually, making these people happy and healthy is all of their job. Everything else should be working towards that goal.
    2
  629. Regardless of what one might think of NATO, membership within has a huge benefit regarding defense. Türkiye will almost certainly not leave the alliance unless it's forced out (for which there is no current mechanism to my knowledge), the alliance collapses, or NATO goes to war with someone Türkiye is unwilling to fight. And in the latter circumstance, they probably will need another alliance to join in order to absorb some of that loss.
    2
  630.  @ramirorodriguez9671  Good corporations are organizers that bring labor and capital resources together to produce goods and services. They do so for the benefit of their shareholders and they are functionally amoral. Labor makes stuff with capital; corporations facilitate that process. Households drive demand and the labor/capital/corporation machine is a mechanism for supply provision and a market lubricant as the primary distributor of purchasing power to households. Corporations have value, but the value should not be overstated; they are an agent of supply, not demand. To the extant that corporations create jobs, it is because household demand creates a need for corporations.
    2
  631.  @nevadataylor  Unfettered liberalism (lack of regulation) is what leads to gross inequality and this is because capitalist priority is short-term profit. Any system that is too dominant has to become authoritarian or fall to the disaffected, this includes liberal free market. The role of government is to provide for the well-being of the governed and that includes regulating entities that have the capacity harm the public. I'd argue that concentrating society's resources in the hands of the few at the expense of the broader public is harming that society and risking insurrection through disaffection is extremely reckless.
    2
  632. I don't think any of us are innocent. I don't think we deserve to die, but we all have a role in the mess we're making.
    2
  633.  @Floridarollin  So your issue is timing?
    2
  634. So when was the last time Trump did what he should do? I think this should have been handled by the ethics committee as well. Unlike Cenk I very much admire Senator Franken and these events are killing me. He's stepping down so that Democrats moving forward aren't credibly accused of hypocrisy in light of our attacks on Trump and people like Ray Moore. It does spotlight the asymmetrical nature of politics where Democrats have to sacrifice their best people in order to avoid hypocrisy while Republicans in order to avoid the same charge get to double down on their worst people.
    2
  635. That's possible, but there is a lot of uncertainty. I don't know what the Israeli nuclear arsenol looks like, but I don't think I'd put it past Netenyahu to deploy it should Iran strike hard. I do not know what the end result of that move would look like. I only know it would be disastrous for humanity. Israel under Netanyahu has definitely pushed past any reasonably defined red lines short of open military attacks. Iran has put up with a lot of garbage, biting its lip all the way. They know that if they play their cards wrong they could be devestated, but they also can't turn the other cheek indefinitely.
    2
  636. Over the top, maybe?
    2
  637. It's really sad that so many have forgotten that the economy is supposed to be a tool for the benefit of people, rather than people being tools for the benefit of the economy.
    2
  638. I don't think they have high-speed rail there yet, but they do have a good line to Lhasa and I believe there is another line under construction.
    2
  639. Biden has never been friendly to China before. Like all American politicians, he trashes China to get cheap votes in the election. Taiwan is in no immediate danger so long as they don't declare independence. China is not anxious to fight a war at this time. Taiwan will be absorbed into China, peacefully or not, sometime in the next thirty years, and that is regardless of who the President of the United States is over the next four.
    2
  640.  Mako  It is true that the future is not set in stone, but I'm pretty confident. If 2050 rolls around without this coming to pass, you can call me a fool and I'll admit to it.
    2
  641.  @joecater894  Actually—it kind of does work that way. Perhaps it shouldn't, but an awful lot of diplomacy, including war, is based on relative strength and proximity. What's right isn't so important as what's real, and Russia is strong, Ukraine is weak, Russia is paranoid about having NATO (an organization expressly designed to contain them) forces on its doorstep and the west is obtusely dismissive of Russia's anxiety. If these antipathies can't be managed diplomatically, then it ends up being played out on a battlefield with a defined winner who gets their way and a loser who gets nothing.
    2
  642.  @buildmotosykletist1987  Sell who you can to. I don't see any potential customers replacing China.
    2
  643.  @buildmotosykletist1987  "China accounts for more than a third of global sales for 22 of Australia's top 30 exports to the nation. Those exports with a dominant Chinese market share were worth $123 billion in 2019, which was 32% of Australia's total exports." ASPI an anti-Chinese Australian think tank. "In 2019, Australia was China's biggest supplier of iron ore, accounting for around 62.2 percent of the total iron ore import tonnage to China. According to the National Bureau of Statistics of China, China imported a total amount of approximately 1,064.12 million metric tons of iron ore in 2018." Stista.com Who else do you think is using that much steel? "Australia typically accounts for up to 40 per cent of the world's malting barley trade, used in beer production, and 20 per cent of feed barley. Well over half its total exports, around 6 million tonnes in a good year, go to China, the world's biggest beer maker." scmp.com 3 million tons doesn't seem like that much. Perhaps that could be made up elsewhere "Top trading partners (import of "Soya beans, whether or not broken.") of Australia in 2019: China with a share of 78% (3.5 million US$) ... Austria with a share of 6.55% (290 thousand US$) Japan with a share of 4.77% (212 thousand US$)" trendeconomy.com irreplaceable
    2
  644.  Gen Info  Thank you for the wonderful compliment; I'm not sure I'm entirely deserving. And thank you for visiting my country. I used to live in the Twin Cities up at the northern end of the Mississippi. You're right, it's a lovely river. I looked at the videos you linked to. I'd already seen the one with the elderly lady. I very much wonder what the true breakdown is between Hong Kong residents that really want separation, those that have mixed feelings who are disturbed by the violence of the demonstrators but are also upset with the actions of the police and government and Beijing's influence on them, and those who believe wholeheartedly that the demonstrators are a bunch of fools playing a dangerous game and jeopardizing the safety and prosperity of everyone in the city. The demonstrations are huge and the sheer percentage of the city's population that turns out for them can't be casually blown off. But from here it looks like the demonstrators are overwhelmingly in their teens and twenties which makes me wonder if this isn't driven more by excitement and social belonging than by rational thought. I think this also has a lot to do with the incidences of violence and vandalism as young participants release their inhibitions in this semi-anonymous theater disregarding the potential consequences or even the morality of such actions. That being said though, I don't know that the entire movement should be viewed as violent and destructive. When you have up to two million people gathering in a relatively small space to express anger at actions of authorities even a tiny percentage of violent activists can cause a lot of damage. The same can be said regarding injuries caused by the police, who I think have shown remarkable restraint in reacting to such large crowds of demonstrators over such a long time subject to projectile and incendiary attacks. I'm frankly amazed that the casualty rate isn't much more severe than what I've heard it to be, and I'm not a defender of police in general. As far as banner slogans like "freedom", "democracy", "universal suffrage", and the like, I know that these are terms aimed at those of us in the West—because they work. I personally think freedom is an extremely nebulous term and most often one persons freedom is purchased with another's obligations. Democracy is of course our political religion and the stated purpose of our existence over here. Real democracy rarely survives a successful revolution and never survives a failed one. Nevertheless, it strokes our collective ego and stokes our collective passion. I'm never quite sure how serious demonstrators outside the West are when invoking these terms. Are they cynical and just saying what they have to to get Western support, or just naive, genuinely believing in the beautiful ideas embedded in these concepts without understanding either the likelihood or the consequences of their success? Of course, I can say all of that from the comfort of a relatively free and functional democracy that I both love and regularly take for granted. My views also have to be taken with the understanding that I'm a pretty hard-core sinophile and have been as long as I can remember. I very much want to see the total reunification of China both because I think it's what China is and should be destined to be and also because I want what I see as the most likely flashpoint between China and the United States (Taiwan) to go away. These demonstrations are, in my view, a threat to that eventuality which puts me politically at odds with the marchers. Because of these obvious biases I try very hard to imagine the legitimate concerns of the opposing side. I'm not sure I'm always successful, but one thing I refuse to do is to view those I disagree with as unworthy of my respect and consideration. My father once visited Singapore on a business trip. He said the city was beautiful and extremely well-functioning. He brought back a memoir of Lee Kuan-Yew which I read some years ago. Lee was a brilliant leader who I sincerely admire, though while it's hard to argue with the phenomenal success of your city, I was not comfortable with the separatist motivation that established it's independence from Malaysia. Please don't take that personally, I have equally uneasy feelings about our break from England. I do think that the Singaporean Mediacorp coverage of Hong Kong is the most balanced I've seen and I very much appreciate that. I do hope to visit your beautiful city one day and I hope that you and your fellow Singaporeans continue to thrive so. Thanks Again, Alan
    2
  645.  @ubroc  "In a conventional war NATO would win decisively." I've thought about this, and a large part of me agrees. The United States and western Europe has population and industrial capacity advantages that I don't see how Russia could overcome unless China came in as a belligerent on Russia's side. And we're really going of the reservation if we entertain that scenario. The one thing I'm not so sure of is NATO's current state of mobilization. I don't think NATO has the brigades of tanks and infantry in marching distance the way that they did during the Cold War. NATO would have to take time to get their troops in place for a full-scale operation. Here again, whether or not NATO would defeat Russia would depend on things like "what defines a victory?", "Where is the war taking place?", and "How long are they willing to fight in order to defeat Russia?". I have no doubt whatsoever that NATO could drive Russia out of Ukraine. That imbalance on Russia's periphery is the reason Russia attacked Ukraine in the first place. Russia is gambling that they can keep NATO from strengthening further without actually engaging directly with them. But if we're talking about NATO troops in Red Square, I think that's less certain, even if we don't consider the nuclear option.
    2
  646.  @ubroc  If no one respected Russia then they would have already been evicted from Ukraine. Respect comes in different forms. Russia is despised, but that is not the same as not respected. Russia is definitely no longer a laughingstock. I get the impression you think they are weak. They definitely have weaknesses, but I don't think they are objectively weak. I respect your right to disagree with me on this point.
    2
  647. The Chinese view has been largely absent from discussion everywhere. The One-Country/Two-Systems isn't just about Hong Kong. One of those two systems is China, as is the one country. From what I understand, the great majority of Chinese believe that the people in Hong Kong are over-privileged self-indulgent elitist whiners who deserve nothing less than an attitude adjustment. I'm not sure that their opinion is as unimportant as the rest of the world seems to think it is.
    2
  648. I'm really sorry to hear that your content has been misused in such a way, though I hardly think it's surprising. Stakes are high and both sides have every incentive to spin whatever information they can get their hands on into a weapon against their adversary. C'est la guerre.
    2
  649. American politicians are not doing anything to help with the problem. Railing against China helps them look good to both the racist and the anticommunist elements within their constituencies. It's an old tactic that never fails to produce dividends in the American political system. The United States currently has no real leverage on China. China would rather not face constant condemnation from much of the world but some of that's coming no matter what they do and they are not going to adjust their policies one inch to satisfy Western critics if they think it in any way endangers their territorial integrity, their control, or their long term ambitions. If we really wanted to help than we should be honest about our intentions with both the protesters and the Chinese government and work towards bringing them together rather than pushing them apart.
    2
  650. Well if Europeans think that Djibouti is "in their neighborhood" then I guess China could be viewed as a potential adversary after all.
    2
  651.  @therealdeal6659  While you are right that "China has benefit mostly from globalization." it can't be denied that China has harnessed that globalization much more successfully than the average country (and perhaps more successfully than any country). There is corruption in China and it has expanded as China's economy has liberalized but China has definitely not succumbed to the kleptocratic excesses seen in so much of the rest of the developing world to the extent that it holds them back. The Chinese people are aware that many are working in dangerous conditions, usually for unscrupulous entrepreneurs hiding their behavior from the government, and there is pressure on the government to clean much of that up. As to questioning a government's legitimacy, that's a dangerous game no matter where you play it.
    2
  652.  Ian from FNQ  Why would you assume such a thing?
    2
  653.  Ian from FNQ  Ahh, nonsense and hyperbole care of the Falun Gong cult. I get where you're coming from now.
    2
  654. Pretty low bar there.
    2
  655. If China really wanted to take Australia they would have to go a step at a time through the island nations of the Western Pacific. Right now that's probably beyond their ability even without U.S. interference. In a decade it won't be, but I can't see any reason why China would want to take Australia anyway.
    2
  656. Combat experience will benefit the United States until China acquires some. I'm guessing that will take about a month. I don't think the United States is going to get much penetration in that short time period. The U.S. won't just be fighting the PLA. We'll be fighting the Chinese people, assuming we actually land. We'll also be fighting the largest industrial engine in the world. And realistically, how much of our military can we dedicate to this mission. Are we pulling out of the Persian Gulf?
    2
  657. Maybe we could raise the age to 81.
    2
  658. I don't think any of us see her as a representative of all Hispanics.
    2
  659. The Reagan Administration.
    2
  660. Space assets may well prove to be the most vulnerable.
    2
  661. The United States has provided some decent arms to the Kurdish fighters. It's still wouldn't be a fair fight by a long shot. Syrian support helps with numbers, allies, and the sovereignty argument.
    2
  662. This is the most I've agreed with Mr. Bremmer in some time.
    2
  663.  @gameslane4908  We owe Washington for the precedent of leaving office before he died. We owe Adams for the precedent of admitting defeat, not challenging the results, and stepping down without making a scene. It's a highly underappreciated precedent, but it has a lot of influence on the survival of our system. I really don't think that we would have seen that level of magnanimity (albeit begrudged magnanimity) from either Jefferson or Hamilton had they lost a presidential election while in office. If not for the precedents set by Washington and Adams, we might very well have had the kinds of disputed elections, bloodshed, and chaos that you see in so many young democracies today.
    2
  664. In fairness, she had a panel that had no representation of the Western viewpoint. And while I don't think the Western viewpoint to be very credible, it is pertinent, and it lends credibility to the Al Jazeera to make sure that that point of view is at least mentioned.
    2
  665. I doubt it will matter what the world will support.
    2
  666. I think it's good that we're looking at something that can be mass-produced. I worry some of our stuff is virtually irreplaceable within the time constraints of an actual war.
    2
  667. That's a false dichotomy. If you take aggressive or frightened or angry people and you give them a tool that allows them to kill easily and instantly then you get needless, senseless, shameful deaths. The killer and the killing tool are both part of the problem, but the second part is a lot easier to identify in advance.
    2
  668.  @Tibetica  "Nationalist peace-lovers" is an oxymoron.
    2
  669. Aren't we all at this point?
    2
  670. Because that geological rock layer is loaded with carbon I suspect.
    2
  671. How does that old saying go? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
    2
  672. The largest like-minded country is run by a mad man. The choices are doctrinal solidarity or competence. China and Germany will work together no matter how much DW hates it.
    2
  673.  @AaronDrake22  What planet are you from?
    2
  674. On the socialist/liberal political axis liberal is definitely on the right. Classic liberals are individualists who push for extremely limited government (low taxes and no regulation). Traditionally they've been exploitative and avaricious. On the conservative/liberal axis they're on the left because they're against traditional institutions like the Church and class (mostly because old money won't let new money play with them). The concept of political left and right is actually way too simplistic, especially considering that these labels have had three centuries to grow and get themselves mangled.
    2
  675. There is no question, but not for the reason you state.
    2
  676.  @mekingtiger9095  My own interpretation is that Russia hoped for a quick and cheap victory but underestimated the Ukrainian resolve. They didn't put all their resources into the invasion in part because they were trying to deny their intention to attack until the moment it happened. Plan A failed, so plan B was put into effect, which is the long slow grind. That may also fail, but we don't know that yet. Obviously the Ukrainians don't want the Russians there, at least in the western half of the country. Occupation, even of part of the country, is likely to be expensive in both lives and treasure, especially with western countries propping up resistance forces for the duration. A victory over the course of a year or two may be invaluable, but an extended stay is likely to be a quagmire.
    2
  677.  snoop alert  That would be the consequence for choosing to use private health insurance.
    2
  678.  snoop alert  You seriously think you can provide the services that government does without a hierarchical structure? You have to have chains of authority, planning, distributive networks, in short—bureaucracy. Without it you have chaos and most of your resources get lost in the mess.
    2
  679. While I don't disagree with anything you've said I think it bares pointing out that the Western world, dominated by the United States, has been holding its breath in anticipation of a hoped-for collapse of China since the inception of the People's Republic with no regard whatsoever of the chaos and suffering that would be caused to the Chinese people should that occur. Part of the reason China is as orwellian as it is is because the rest of the world is so passively hostile.
    2
  680.  @tj4902  That line of thinking is why the Middle East is always aflame. Eliminating the forces of order doesn't lead to Utopia, it leads to mass misery.
    2
  681.  @eviken1982  I don't think it is. I think it's genuinely their primary concern and I think they've done some disturbing things in the past to secure it and what they're doing now to secure it is concerning.
    2
  682. I lot can be done through selective omission.
    2
  683. Your puritanical definition of socialism is what keeps support of it forever a minority position.
    2
  684.  @pakde8002  There's no guarantee that any current government will survive to 2049, but I have confidence in some of them. I think China's government has as good a chance as any, and better than most.
    2
  685.  @DabiOW  I don't think it was senseless whim. I think it was destined to happen later if the United States and the rest of NATO insisted that Ukraine could one day be a member. I just thought that the chaos that Russia had sown and nurtured in Ukraine meant that NATO membership was off the table for now and that Russia could afford to wait. I also thought it unlikely that Russia would come in at more-or-less the same time that the western noise machine was saying they would. I could understand if he'd been openly preparing for an invasion the way the United States did prior to going into Iraq in '91 or '03, but if you are going to deny it in the lead up, why make yourself into a liar and your adversaries into seers by following their timetable? That, I didn't get.
    2
  686.  Adversary American  None of these were invasion attempts..
    2
  687. There was a lost generation of Mainland youth in the sixties and seventies. In many ways it was tragic, but in the end most of them ended up okay.
    2
  688. I hope you're right about Iran not being attacked. I don't have such confidence.
    2
  689.  @josearaujo8616  I disagree with you that freedom is an essential part of a democracy. One of the great fears of Alexander Hamilton was something called "the Tyranny of the Majority", and he had good reason to fear it. I don't think I'm confusing freedom with agreeing with a decision that restricts freedom. Then again, I'm not advocating for freedom. I would contend that dictatorships do not always have popular support. They are often one false move away from overthrow, which is why so many dictators are paranoid. A competent dictator can be an asset during a crisis, but outside of a crisis they are often resented. For this reason many of them consistently seek new crises.
    2
  690.  @atlanticatracking7286  "And before you go say that Tibet is part of China, don't. Tibet is a country." Whether that's true or not, it's still part of China.
    2
  691. As an establishment Democrat I would like to push back on a couple of things said in this clip. First of all, any Democrat is better than any Republican, period. There is no way that I, nor do I suspect any other genuine Democrat, would ever vote for a moderate Republican over a progressive Democrat. There are probably some folks with no party loyalties that are currently registered as Democrats that would do that, but they are not establishment Democrats, they're either loyal to something else, like say an industry or a class, or they're not very political at all and can be easily swayed by corporate propaganda. What Democratic strategists seek to avoid is a situation like 2016 where the primary contest between the establishment Democrat and the progressive Democrat was so rancorous that many of the primary loser's supporters decided not to show up in the general, or even voted for the Republican in an act of revenge. It's certainly okay to argue about the wisdom of this approach. The primaries are kind of a loose-loose situation where you win by alienating much of the support you need later. It's the old circular firing squad. Unfortunately Democrats are much worse about getting back in line than Republicans are. Honestly, I'd love to have a good charismatic progressive candidate and I'd happily vote for them. I've never liked Biden, I'm not thrilled with his domestic agenda and I absolutely loath his foreign policy, but I voted for him because the country, and usually the world, is much better off with a Democrat in office than with a Republican. I don't have a favorite at this point, but unless I see some real talent throw their name into the hat, I'll be voting for Biden again.
    2
  692.  @dickusmaxximun8126  You're right, there is no comparison. Western propaganda is considerably more sophisticated.
    2
  693. Why would any decent person want the collapse of China to be true? You're talking about directly disrupting the lives of a billion people, and indirectly disrupting the lives of countless others. If we were wishing for the demise of every "regime" that was at least as cruel and dangerous as that of modern China, than we would be pushing for the total collapse of human civilization.
    2
  694. Don't hold your breath.
    2
  695. The Chinese understand that a war with the United States is going to be punishing. The Chinese lost a million soldiers in Korea. That's not forgotten. The Chinese also don't want to go to war to reincorporate Taiwan and then lose. This would no only be a serious military, diplomatic, and economic setback, but it would be seen as an exacerbation of the century of humiliation, so they want to be reasonably sure of victory before making that kind of commitment. Resistance in Taiwan is an unknown quantity, as is participation of Western-leaning states in the region. To be on the safe side, China has to feel like they can overcome all of that. That being said, the Chinese people won't wait forever. And if the government in Taiwan declares independence, it may very well force the mainlanders to act before they are fully ready.
    2
  696.  @wanghui562  Fair enough, I can be very long-winded. I hope that the reunification is peaceful, and that I can see it before I die.
    2
  697. They're in too deep; they know they have no way out so they've adopted an Alamo mentality.
    2
  698.  @cahyaindralesmana2296  Oceans are downhill, deserts, at least the uninhabited ones, are usually higher up.
    2
  699. It's been a while since we've seen that level of American generosity, and that was pretty much solely to thwart Soviet global ambitions. Unless the United States thinks that Korea might be lost to a rival I don't see us whipping out the checkbook.
    2
  700. All of the Israelis are of Palestinian origin.
    2
  701. If you think the police have been overly violent during these protests then either those of us outside of Hong Kong are getting very sanitized reports or your expectations of the police are absurd. Considering the scope and longevity of these protests there have been remarkably few civilian injuries and the only fatal casualties I can find mentioned appear to be suicide martyrs.
    2
  702.  @jaymelee23 That's been the case for forty years now. I don't think that can be put on Biden particularly.
    2
  703. The Chinese position was hostile and petulant?
    2
  704. 林振华 The risk with building infrastructure is that it has an upkeep cost. If you can't afford to maintain your infrastructure then it becomes a boondoggle. I'm not suggesting that's the case with this highway, it's just the worst-case scenario with infrastructure investment.
    2
  705.  @yoshi7390  China was much weaker (and Britain much stronger) when that agreement was made. Perhaps China should honor the 50-year commitment, but they no longer have to.
    2
  706.  @rubenhaug3978  While I agree that the kind of power held by the Soviets is in many ways different than that of the modern Chinese and that that makes comparisons difficult, the Soviet Union was absolute in its influence where it existed. The countries of Eastern Europe and Cuba marched in lock step to the Soviet fife and drum. North Korea and Vietnam were also under heavy influence, and there were numerous non-aligned states, including at times China, where Soviet influence was at least as strong as American influence.
    2
  707.  @sonarbangla8711  I think that would be a fantastic way to reduce the potential for disaster in the region (though we need a peaceful reunification of Korea as well). This would save the most lives and probably give the people of Taiwan their brightest future.
    2
  708. I imagine that the capitalists would have reacted by making sure that not a single initiative of that president made it through the halls of Congress. We're so far gone in this country that solutions are hard to contemplate. Most Americans are home "owners" and their perceived economic fates are tied to ever inflating housing prices. Our retirements are now all connected to the stock markets, and consequently, financial managers are now legally required to choose actions that increase the short-term value of company stocks over actions that improve the long-term health of companies and their employees. The financiers of America have succeeded in making every possible solution to the wealth inequality problem into a political third rail, and it's going to take a wholesale reeducation of the American electorate to change that reality. And of course, they'll fight that tooth and nail.
    2
  709.  @vintageb8  That depends on the people. Some want security, comfort, and a sense of order. Of course neither group really respects the other.
    2
  710. I sympathize with both China's and Russia's security concerns. However, they are both keen to establish and defend hegemony in their respective regions. In fact their only real point of contention is how to divide their hegemonic influence in central Asia.
    2
  711.  array s  Look, I don't like Trump either, but suggesting that he should be assassinated is unconscionable. There's an election coming up, that's how we need to get rid of him. We don't want to get into the habit of killing off our leaders, even the ones that really suck.
    2
  712.  @timtim6887  I don't know how much the protests are affecting the finance firms. It appears to be affecting business travelers, but I don't think that is that big of a concern. Financial firms will stay in Hong Kong if the cost/benefit analysis is stronger in Hong Kong than it would be to move to another Chinese city (or nearby non-Chinese city). Government regulation and market access are probably the biggest factors in that calculus (as well as the physical and systemic costs of moving). I would imagine that right now they intend to stay put.
    2
  713.  Young Tang  You may make an argument that Hong Kongers for independence and freedom, but that act will in no way maintain and secure the future of peace and prosperity for Hong Kong. In fact, the results will be quite the opposite.
    2
  714. I don't think the Chinese care about having the highest number. What they care about is having enough assets to do the job, whatever that number turns out to be.
    2
  715.  @canman5060  Some did, other's were dredges of abject poverty.
    2
  716.  @cyanproductions4517  Actually the key to control of the country is control of the countryside. I'm not sure Russia has that either though. Isolating a city from the rest of the country is an effective strategy because it undermines the ability of the provincial seat to manage the region and to care for its people.
    2
  717.  @derek3266  I don't know if the Spanish made any coordinated complaints about being tagged with an epidemic that started in Iowa. At this point I think it would be very difficult to find out. The thing is, the description of this corona virus as a Chinese virus or a China virus is done by people trying to diminish China and its affecting Chinese people, people of Chinese background, and other people of East Asian background. There is no good reason to describe it in these terms at this time when when we need to work together to defeat this thing. You can say that China is being too sensitive about this. And while I think that defending their reputation is a worthwhile endeavor, regardless of their actions, referring to the virus as the China virus is callously racist whatever your justification for it.
    2
  718. A nation is not multicultural. That would be an empire, of which the United States is, as are Russia, China and any other country worth living in if you don't happen to belong to the dominant bloodline. The nation state is the most destructive concept ever to come out of the enlightenment.
    2
  719.  @sobersu1499  Singapore is entirely urban. Many Chinese cities are as developed as Singapore, including Hong Kong.
    2
  720. So, because it's not as bad as a city besieged it's okay. What the hell is happening to us? When did our people become expendable?
    2
  721. No killing, no disease, no theft of land, maybe some forced education to a small percentage of the population. Troubling? perhaps. I'd hardly call it genocide.
    2
  722. Everybody's mind is already made up. If the investigation says it started in China then those that want to blame China will be thrilled to get that affirmation while China's defenders will question the results. If it says it didn't start in China then those that want to blame China will claim that China messed with the investigation or bribed the WHO while the China defenders will run a pyrrhic victory lap. Nobody's mind is going to be changed by the results of this investigation. But it's still good to try to find out the origins for scientific rather than political reasons.
    2
  723.  @macwilko  It makes sense to be transparent and open if two conditions are met. 1. You didn't do anything horribly egregious. 2. You think you'll get fair treatment. China knows that that second item is not happening. As for the first, I don't think there is much evidence of truly egregious error or activity, but there might be something I don't know about. There was some mishandling by the local officials in Wuhan who didn't want to shut down the economy during a festival that they had invested a lot of time and money in. But that's known and those officials were fired for their misprioritization just a few days after their festival occurred. Everything else seems to be consistent with what behavior could be expected considering what was known about the virus and when it was known. But of course, that's why there is an investigation.
    2
  724.  @macwilko  I think you're right about that. I don't know if people will believe the truth. I'm not even sure I'll believe the truth. But that won't keep it from being true.
    2
  725.  @dotoroyuriha7411  Preach it. But I was answering a specific query on the likelihood of origin rather than the handling of the virus. I think the Chinese are owed a debt of gratitude for how seriously they did take it compared to some other unnamed countries. But that even further underscores the point. If it didn't originate in China then why was the first city that got hit hard in China. As incompetent as the rest of the world has been in dealing with it, shouldn't the entire world have been on fire concurrently or even prior to Wuhan if that were the case? Here in America our traditional minority communities are getting hit a lot harder than the white community. Some of this maybe socio-economic rather than biological, but at least here your point about racial resistance is not playing out. I don't know about your last point. It may be a good argument. It still doesn't answer the question though. Why Wuhan first?
    2
  726. Some of China's success dates back to Mao's policies, though not necessarily in a good way. One of the results of the Chinese Revolution was the total liquidation of the landed class. Because of this, most of the people capable of corrupting the system to benefit themselves and their families personally during the Mao years were either killed, exiled, or politically emasculated. I like to say that Mao burned down the forest so that a new generation of seedlings could grow. Deng's policies of liberalization certainly were key to bringing in international economic stimulation, but there was always a balance maintained between free market and state-owned industry, in part to make sure that no class of tycoons would ever become powerful enough to control the political narrative. It was during Deng's time that embezzlers and other economic corruptors were routinely executed. The party maintains its grip on power, and its control of the media narrative means that the government can make decisions without having to compromise with the rich. Taxes can be effectively collected and resources properly targeted to meet what the government thinks are the true needs of the country and the people. And access to government power is predicated on performance from small jurisdictions to jurisdictions of ever increasing size if and only if ambitious targets are met and exceeded. Politicians do not have to stand for election and effective governors are far less likely to be dethroned through media smear jobs. China does have problems, but China's determination, structure, and timing have all been extremely fortuitous. I wish India the best of luck going forward towards their own superpower station, but I don't think India has the proper ingredients to do it like China did, and in some ways that's a good thing. I don't know how likely China's model was to work as it did, but I think India's road is going to be much slower, assuming that it arrives at all.
    2
  727. They could just steamroll in and end the one country two systems policy now.
    2
  728. I'm no fan of Biden. I think that among the Democrats running in 2020, he was the worst choice to be president. He might have been the best choice to become president. I'll never know, because we'll never see if any of the others would have won. In some ways it's a pity, because I don't think he's been a good president. In fact I feel quite strongly that he's the worst Democratic president of my lifetime. So, should we primary him out? I don't think that's a good idea, but it's not because !!SHUT UP!!, it's because incumbency is such an advantage in an election that no other Democrat has as much a chance of defeating Trump. Now, I don't know that Biden will defeat Trump. While there is a strong argument that if we're going to lose we might as well lose with a dignified candidate, as long as there is a chance to win I feel pretty compelled to go with the candidate most likely to win, even if he's a bad candidate. I would pick any bad Democrat over any Republican, and this isn't just any Republican we're looking at, this is the worst case scenario. I know ya'll disagree with me, and I think, like our hosts here say, that it's good to discuss it. I see your point of view. Sadly, there is no way to know once we make a decision how it would have gone if we would have made a different one. I think that Biden, as much as I dislike him, is our best chance of beating Trump. If Biden loses to Trump I will believe that no Democrat could've beaten him—you'll believe that we could've beaten him if we just put somebody decent up against him. If Biden beats Trump, I'll believe we narrowly dodged a bullet only because we put up the only guy who could beat him—you'll shake your head in disgust because that will be evidence to you that any Democrat could've beat Trump and that we wasted a great opportunity to have a really good president instead of ole senile Joe Chest-Thumper. We'll each believe what we'll believe because there will be no hard evidence in existence to change our minds. There was a real problem with false equivalency in the media in 2016. I don't think Jon Stewart was engaging in that neither then nor now. Those of us who were deeply invested in the Clinton campaign were traumatized by it, and we're a little over-sensitive about it. I don't expect your sympathy because I know better. My own advice is that if you genuinely think the country is better off with a different Democratic candidate than Biden, then exercise your rights while you still can and take a shot. I'll be opposing you the whole way. Good Luck, and may the least bad man (or woman) win.
    2
  729. Neither is Blinken really.
    2
  730. Let's not drag God into this.
    2
  731.  @Teffi_Club  I'm not sure that it's a good idea to get into the habit of obtaining revenue through the sale of confiscated goods. It's kind of corrupt as a practice.
    2
  732.  @bencapper6657  Unfortunately, that is political affiliation.
    2
  733.  @MacrobianNomad  That's assuming "Assad's barrel bombs" were not a self-inflicted ruse to gain western sympathies. Conspiracy theories based on the fact (and backed up by the Syrian ambassador at the time) that there was no conceivable benefit to the Syrian military aside. Western support has always been more of the verbal variety than the physical. The western approach has always leaned more towards instigation than investment. And frankly, it's probably better that we don't go all out. The places we have recently (Iraq, Afghanistan) haven't exactly been unqualified success stories.
    2
  734. Where do you draw the line? ---------- at consenting adults.
    2
  735.  @oofing7953  It's possible that Mr. Lin is just pointing out press bias here.
    2
  736.  Dave Daniels  We all have our biases. I'm not sure what his are. I don't know if he's being straight or sarcastic in his comment.
    2
  737. First of all, I'm sorry that people you care about have attacked you. I'm sorry that you and your family are caught up in this conflict and I'm sorry that you are being punished for expressing your point of view. I'm not surprised though. Yours is hardly the first family to be torn asunder by ideological differences during political conflicts. You've chosen to express support for one side and in the process you've confirmed a xenophobic stereotype of Westerners by advocating the rights of individuals to protest over the future of a united Chinese people and the international reputation of their country. I'm not saying you are wrong, but the potential consequences for the position you are taking and that you've telegraphed through your channel in the past should have been easily anticipated. I hope that the situation in Hong Kong stabilizes soon for your sake, for the sake of your family and for the sake of the people of Hong Kong. I hope the repercussions of these events are minimized for those involved and I hope that you and your family can get passed this ugliness, forgive each other, and find common appreciation in the things you can agree on. You have my best wishes through this difficult time.
    2
  738. This is what I'd like to see a Democratic southern strategy look like. I want to take back the south, and I want to do it without racism. I think folks like Mr. Ojeda are crucial for any such notion.
    2
  739. Mr. Antsy, I totally agree with you. There has to be an incentive to succeed otherwise people won't try. That being said, there's no need, considering our capacity as a society, for nutritional shortage, homelessness, lack of medical care, poor infrastructure, etc., etc. A lot of the misery present in our society is due to a lack of will to deal with it and much of that is because those with the power to make change are comfortable with the status quo (why wouldn't they be?). There certainly is no need for one individual to be absorbing a billion dollars worth of resources. The prospect of obtaining a little fame, having authority to make decisions and bringing in a quarter of a million dollars a year in today's dollars should be enough incentive for anybody to work hard and be as clever as possible so long as we make sure that contributors are recognized and lauded for their contributions and that free riders, when identified are called out and punished. There are always going to be abusers of any system. In a socialist system the abusers are free riders who absorb public services while refusing to contribute. In a liberal system the abusers are exploiters who concentrate the contributions of the many into the hands of an avaricious few. The real danger to society is ideological purity. If you go totally socialist nobody has any incentive to contribute and society stagnates. If you go totally liberal that the vast majority of the population is impoverished and miserable while the tiny sliver of rich people live in a state of constant paranoia. The best answers are in the middle and the optimal position changes from society to society depending on their development as well as other needs and conditions.
    2
  740. It is a good argument for impeaching the president—one of many. The counter-argument is that it's too risky, and not just from a partisan standpoint. If Trump "wins" an impeachment contest (and with the make-up of the Senate he will), then that will be proof that nothing can stop him. By trying to impeach (which most of the country thinks of as to remove) a wannabe dictator and failing, we may be shoring up his position, not as the Republican candidate for President, but as the political juggernaut against whom all resistance falls. It's an outside chance that this could accelerate the process of turning him into the dictator he wants to be. Nothing that's supposed to have checked him up to this point has. Forcing the issue may bring him down, but with the Senate make-up it probably won't. If it galvanized his position and solidified his power, it might be the biggest mistake we ever made.
    2
  741.  @USSAnimeNCC-  You mean, like a missile?
    2
  742. There's also a lot more potential floor space on planets and moons and the costs of moving things around in space is high. It's so high that trade is unlikely and market capitalism actually suppresses innovation unless the habitations are very close to each other. On a planet's surface movement dynamics between sources and consumers make trade viable between intraplanetary settlements even if the planets are more isolated from each other.
    1
  743. But you've been cold to me so long I'm crying icicles instead of tears. If you build a Dyson sphere between us and the sun we may have a bit of a heating issue.
    1
  744. Yeah I know. I don't think it would be difficult to have it operate like Venetian blinds where every time an orbiting location that needed solar energy (like the Earth) passed behind slats could be opened wholly or partially depending on their needs. I just wanted to point out that if you didn't do something like that, you'd be blotting out the sun.
    1
  745. I'd say that the odds are pretty good that it would not be much worse.
    1
  746. I suppose there is always a shadow of a doubt. But I'm quite comfortable saying that the loss of a hundred years of medicinal knowledge is not a prize worth allowing the horrific medical experimentation carried out be the Nazis during their regime. It's not just a matter of counting corpses. We cannot allow for rounding up groups of people to be used as guinea pigs now and if one could prevent it from occurring in the past then they would have the same level of moral obligation to do so as they would for preventing it from occurring in the present. Besides that, this isn't the only argument for attempting to prevent the Third Reich from ascending under the historical leadership.
    1
  747. You are correct in saying that that there is no guaranty that it would have been better. However, considering how bad it got, I believe it more likely to have been better than to have been worse.
    1
  748. Yes you are innocent. You only stood by and watched it happen. You only refused to try and stop it. How could we possibly blame you?
    1
  749. Over the last three decades the government of China has proven much more flexible than that of the United States. The gentleman who best explains this is a fellow named Eric Xi. China has its issues, but rigidity in government doesn't seem to be one of them. Perhaps you're confusing it with North Korea.
    1
  750. Arvin, America does give a crap about other people. Our biggest problem is that so many of us believe that what people really need more than anything else is freedom and democracy and sometimes we'll let our ideology blind us from reality. Sometimes we'll burn a witch in order to save her soul but it's not because we're evil, it's because we're dogmatic.
    1
  751. Never bring a wand to a staff fight.
    1
  752. I think this is a fairly sober analysis of what would likely happen. China would lose almost all of its projection platforms but would almost certainly fend off any kind of land invasion. If the war stretched out to a year and and production capacity became the defining factor it would still be complicated. China would probably have a marginal edge in industrial production if they could keep their factories relatively safe. The U.S. would have to reestablish its industries but U.S. factories would be beyond the range of military attack. And then there is the cyber angle.
    1
  753. It depends on what you mean by "colonized". China has been conquered twice, once by the Mongols and once by the Manchus. It has also been partially conquered by the Jurchen's and by the Japanese. The first three groups were eventually absorbed into China and the Japanese were expelled within a generation.
    1
  754. I counted 25 crew members on the original series, Next Generation and Voyager. Three were East Asian, none were South Asian or West Asian. Considering that Asians represent over half the population of the world today it appears that there may have indeed been a genocide between the twenty-first and twenty-fourth centuries, but it wasn't white.
    1
  755. Remind me again, which bombing did BLM claim responsibility for?
    1
  756. "Alan Friesen weak." …but accurate.
    1
  757. Just because something doesn't last forever doesn't mean it failed.
    1
  758. You lost me there.
    1
  759. There are potential models for rebuilding more quickly. In 1952 South Korea was the poorest country on the planet. By the 1970's it was completely rebuilt and moving towards a place among the world's first class economies. The same is true more-or-less in Taiwan and Singapore. It will depend upon government discipline, popular work ethic, vision, foreign and domestic investment targeting and effective resistance of international meddling. It's a tall order, but it's not impossible.
    1
  760. In the Democratic party there is a struggle for control between progressives on the left and moderates, who many progressives - not without some justification - label as corporatists, in the center. In the Republican party this struggle doesn't occur because there are no progressives and the number of Republican moderates is dwindling. There is no credible third party and there is not likely to be one in our lifetime. Hillary Clinton wants Democrats, progressive and moderate, to fill the seats in the Senate, House and in State and municipal offices because they are more likely to help her push the agenda she cares most about: women's and children's issues in the U.S. and throughout the world. Her other actions are going, likewise, in pursuit of these primary goals. That means interacting with moneyed interests who can finance global initiatives, following the Democratic platform crafted with Senator Sanders in order to try to keep the support of progressives, occasionally selling out progressive goals in exchange for Republican votes or public relations points that she feels will move the country towards a "her" view of a better America. And most of all, positioning herself so that she can do these things. She's probably not going to be exactly what you're looking for. On the other hand Mr. Trump's chief concern seems to be his status as a big shot. It looks to me like he is most likely to pursue policies that target the weak in our society so that he can always be on the winning side. I think he will support or attack people, laws and policies based on what he feels will result in adoration and loyalty. He'll attack the government as being something threatening to people so that he can blame the bureaucracy and the "stooges" in Congress for all his failings. You're not going to get overwhelming progressive policy in the near future. If you really want power you need to understand that it's a generational project. Your best bet is to slowly and methodically infiltrate the Democratic party so that you have a legitimate power base from which to effect policy. Progressives frequently call for a revolution. If Donald Trump is president he may very well institute one. Just remember, his lynch mobs are armed to the teeth.
    1
  761. I always liked the Johnny Bravo version of "It's a Good Life"
    1
  762. Immediately after that exchange Trump said that he had a meeting set up with Congressman Cummings but that Cummings backed out of it. He then suggested that he backed out under pressure because Senator Schumer, who he referred to as a lightweight, probably told him to back out of the meeting. Congressman Cummings apparently doesn't remember such an appointment. I suspect that's because no such appointment ever existed but what do I know? http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/02/16/democratic-congressman-baffled-trump-comments/98007346/
    1
  763. The U.S. hasn't faced a foe with effective air defenses since the Korean War. The Chinese have good anti-aircraft artillery and their fighter aircraft will have the same benefit the Germans had in the First World War. Namely, they will have flexibility in engagement because they do not have to worry about running out of fuel. Also, infantry is hard to destroy by air if they are in the field because they are not lumped into a convenient target; they're spread out.
    1
  764. I think every generation is seen as lazy and naive during their twenties and thirties by the generations that have already passed through that period. As a Gen X-er I feel like I can remember that kind of dismissive attitude from boomers and I know they felt it from the "Greatest Generation". Laziness and naivete is something you grow out of or die. I have to admit I don't like the proliferation of social media and I hate cell phones with a passion. But they're part of the landscape for the future and crying about it isn't going to help. While I'm offended by someone putting their phone between us in a social setting, millennials are going to be fine with it when interacting with each other. The job market is definitely looser than it was during the sixties and during the nineties, but it goes back and forth — and millennials aren't the only generation dealing with that reality. At least millennials have time on their side right now. A working-age boomer trying to get work right now is in a lot more trouble than a millennial. Judging from the comments, I think everyone is clamoring to be recognized as the most put-upon generation and we're all suffering from the inability to see the challenges faced by those of different ages. In the end, we're all just people trying to make a living, less entitled than we think we ought to be, envious of those we perceive as having power when we're young and envious of those we perceive as having time when we're old, all on a journey from wild-eyed idealist to crotchety old bastard. And you know what? None of us are perfect.
    1
  765. Some of our voters appreciate a business sensitivity and backed Trump because he's a "Businessman". Unfortunately they made a poor business decision — purchasing an undefined product they've never seen based solely on the promise of the person selling it. Having said this, I really do sympathize with folks who can't afford the premiums on their currently purchased policies. I would respectively suggest that that is not the kind of problem salesmen like Trump and the Republican Congressmen are likely to fix.
    1
  766. Just a conspiracy theory here. Do you think it's possible that considering the nightmare that his job must have been, perhaps he did resign, as in, walk out? And maybe the administration is willing to let everyone think he was fired because it's better for Trump's ego?
    1
  767. You might want to check out Sherman's march to the sea.
    1
  768. "+Alan Friesen ....? what does the Savannah Campaign have to do with this? you lost me...sorry. Reply " Yeah, looking back at the thread I'm not sure what the hell I was talking about. Sorry for the confusion.
    1
  769.  @slashandbones13  Keep going back—Barbarella, Cleopatra Jones…
    1
  770. I'm not sure I would agree with you about his rights not being infringed upon. If carrying a weapon was the only "threatening" action he was taking and that action is constitutionally protected then he was killed for carrying a gun. That might not have been the intention of the officer but that was the outcome. And while I'm sure Officer Yanez regrets the turn events took that day and would bring Mr. Castille back if he could, there is no way this is accidental and unfortunately its not freakish enough. As for the disproportion suggested, I was basing that anecdotally on appearances of stories like this within the mainstream media but googling police harassment statistics two of the first four hits were articles from Vanity Fair (http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/data-police-racial-bias) and the New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/08/us/study-supports-suspicion-that-police-use-of-force-is-more-likely-for-blacks.html?_r=0) which indicating a rather disconcerting disproportion of police violence and fatalities directed towards Blacks. The other two hits backed me up as well but based on your earlier comments I thought it unlikely you would respect articles from mic.com and news.vice.com. "'Were you truly facing imminent loss of life' --- impossible to know until you're dead." This statement is only true if the victim is armed, and not always the case then. The Castille case is one where nobody at trial suggested that Officer Yanez faced imminent loss of life, only that he thought he did. If he thought he did it may have made sense for him to kill Mr. Castille, but I suggest that it doesn't make sense to shoot without severe consequences. If you are going to kill somebody you should be willing to go to jail for it, it should always be that grave of a decision. While I respect your position that this is relatively rare, a position that this 2015 article in the Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries) somewhat sensationally rejects, the appearance and likely reality that it dis-proportionally affects minorities is a huge problem and we need to find a better way to address it. And while you are correct that this one incident does not prove they (police) aren't responsible as a whole, it is not the only incident - and neither are all the incidents that make headlines. Maybe we don't need to take their service weapons away, but maybe the threat of such a solution would encourage police to be more reluctant in their use of lethal force. I know you are concerned about the lives and livelihoods of police officers. I know that being a police officer is a scary job. But we seem to rank unemployment and incarceration of momentarily frightened cops involved in unintended tragedies as greater than the deaths of non-dangerous and, in many cases, intentionally compliant citizens. There may be an argument for not trying to compound a tragedy but there is a glaring miscarriage of justice that is tearing this country apart and we need to get control of this situation sooner rather than later.
    1
  771. Okay, obviously neither one of us is going to change the other's mind. I appreciate that you've been cordial in your debate but I think we have a real problem with police brutality and racial injustice and I think that your arguments and the arguments of others like you are exacerbating these problems. I'm sure you have some opinions on how I'm ruining life as well and that's just going to be the way it is. My reasoning behind the statement pointed out is that if the person you're confronting is unarmed, you won't be dead. Yes, there are other ways to be killed but in most circumstances where the only gun involved is yours you're not going to die. I understand your concerns about the risks police take and the legitimacy of self defense and I'm not entirely unsympathetic. I'm generally an advocate of assumed innocence and it's very difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a cop wasn't fearing for his life in part because cops are trained to always be fearing for their life. And that's a big part of the problem. Firearms make killing so easy that if we're going to let people walk around with that kind of power (as our Second Amendment insists we must) then we have to find a way to make people very reluctant to use them for the purpose of killing another human being. And allowing people who kill others whether they are cops or not to avoid punishment if it can't be proven that they were not afraid is not going to encourage any reluctance. I'll leave you with one more thought. If Philandro Castille shot Officer Yanez during that traffic stop and he used as his defense that because Officer Yanez reached for his weapon he feared that he would be shot and likely killed by Officer Yanez, would Mr. Castille be permitted to walk away a free man? Would we want that to be the case? I think the answer to both questions is a resounding "no", even though we do know now that it would have been, because it was, a deadly accurate fear. Thanks again for your civility; this will be my last post on this subject. Alan
    1
  772. Mr. Clockwork, so many people are always worried about a world government and there is legitimate concern about whether that government would be a good government or not but there would be many advantages to a world government. It would almost certainly reduce and likely eliminate the instances of war and it's effective horrors. It would eliminate "off-shoring" style tax evasion, it would eliminate the risk of nuclear annihilation and it would provide a legal authority to which all people could have recourse. Their would be no evasion of jurisdiction for hackers, tax cheats, embezzlers, traffickers, fugitives or other ne'er-do-wells. The entire planet's resources could be focused on non-conflict related priorities like poverty elimination, climate stabilization and space exploration to name a few. Of course whether or not it would be a good government would depend on whether or not the government was strong, largely uncorrupted and had the interests of the people at heart, but that's the case with any government. Of course people who are satisfied with their current states government (both with the way the government works and the influence the government carries in the world) are unlikely to want to risk the kind of change that would usher in a global government so it's really unlikely we'll ever see a truly effective global government, but we shouldn't be inherently afraid of one, so long as we take measures to ensure that it governs well.
    1
  773. But I'm sad to say I'm on my way, won't be back for many a day, My heart is down, my head is turning around I had to leave a little girl in Kingston Towne.
    1
  774. For starters, I'd have the government guarantee the pensions. I'd take this opportunity to discuss options for state medical coverage, see what kind of resistance they felt for a single-payer healthcare program and ask if they had a better idea. I think it's important to have a conversation about the reality that coal mining jobs will continue to disappear but also to try to brainstorm with them for ways for folks to make a good living without coal with an emphasis on comparably paid income streams. While I think that might come to naught, if they come to that conclusion with us instead of from us, it might be easier to swallow. Even so, those communities are still going to need economic support and at the same time they'll need to find a self-satisfactory justification for their existence. By the way it's not just Appalachia. We have the same issues in the timber towns here in Oregon.
    1
  775. I always see a lot of folks talking about how China doesn't want to police the world. That may be the case for the moment, but when China feels like it's strong enough and potentially influential enough to rewrite the rules of the game in it's favor away from the Western status quo that is likely to change. I don't think the United States is seriously going to decline in power any time soon and what loss of influence occurs will mostly be a matter of stable countries gaining confidence in their own abilities over time. I think at the heart the U.S. and China are extremely similar, large imperial states — natural regional hegemons. I think leaders in both countries are keenly aware of history and anxious to make sure it doesn't recur (or at least I did before this last election). But I don't think either country is inherently violent or inherently peaceful, both countries want to be influential and in control and there will always be tension but not necessarily conflict.
    1
  776. I turned the radio on in my car on the way to work and heard what I thought was a parody. After a few minutes it dawned on me that Trump was holding a press conference and the things he was saying were absolutely — strange. He was belittling his interviewers, making grandiose statements completely devoid of details and often of coherence. He was using totally irrelevant bits of "information" to "prove" his points. It was absolutely surreal.
    1
  777. You could definitely have a simplified Chinese keyboard. There are 32 strokes which could each be given a key. Strokes could be keyed out in stroke order and once all of the character's strokes are pressed a separate key that tells the writing program that the word is finished could be depressed at which point the writing program looks up which character has that stroke order and replaces the line of individual strokes with the appropriate character. Today's writing programs certainly have enough computing power to make that seemless and simplified Chinese could be written in this was as quickly as English on a QWERTY board (and printed documents would require a lot less paper). The question is, is it worth investing in something like that when all keyboards may soon be obsolete?
    1
  778. "Nowadays, of course, imperialism has been replaced by mercantilism, and the global language of mercantilism is English." That is the case now (hence your use of the term 'Nowadays') But that has little to do with any superior traits of the English language and everything to do with the last two centuries being dominated by English speaking global superpowers. Chinese imperialism is every bit as impressive as British imperialism. It's older, its global population percentages are comparable and it's far more lasting. Where it falls short in comparison is in it's geographical reach, but unlike British imperialism the final chapter of Chinese imperialism has yet to be written so that may or may not be the case going forward. I disagree that English is, "…ideally situated to become the world's lingua franca." It's a difficult language to speak and as an alphabetic language you can't communicate in English without learning how to speak it. Mandarin Chinese is probably more difficult to learn to speak but you don't have to learn to speak it in order to communicate through it. Because of this subject peoples are able to maintain their mother tongues and still function effectively within the empire. As for a spoken imperial language, something with less deviances in its rule set like German or Spanish or just anything with less French influence would probably prove to be a better fit.
    1
  779. I think if we wanted to design a really good lingua franca with today's conditions in mind I'd suggest Castilian Spanish as the spoken component and Simplified Chinese as the written component.
    1
  780. Not at this time, but you could have communications receptors and transponders with mobility or protectively buried that an Earth-bound system could access for about half of every day.
    1
  781. I think this probably was carried out by somebody on the Syrian side but I agree with Cenk, it smells wrong. The reasons I can think why it might have been carried out by the regime are #1 the politically astute within the regime including Assad don't have control over their forces, #2 if, as I understand, the town is largely pro-rebel it could be strictly an act of vengeance, or #3 a gas attack might be a way of killing your enemy while limiting the amount of damage to infrastructure. I heard a regime representative speaking to the BBC saying much the same thing that Cenk was saying, "Why would we do this? We are perfectly capable of winning this war without using chemical weapons." and "We don't have chemical weapons." I have no faith in the second part of that. The regime may very well have chemical weapons. But I think he has a point about the first part. Why risk increasing the role of West-dominated international community at this point? I don't think I buy the argument that Russia is actively giving Trump a way to disingenuously criticize Russia for appearances sake. I think that if Russia believes Assad is responsible for this attack then I think they will be very angry with him over it. I think that if this is somehow a conspiracy to frame the regime, which I doubt but I will talk about it in a minute, the real target of that would be Iran. Assad's state adversaries in the Gulf are really enemies of Iran and if this chemical attack is "traced" to Iran I'll definitely throw in with the conspiracy nuts. I fear that Trump might have a desire to fight Iran that rivals GWB's desire to fight Iraq and I think it has a lot to do with friends in the gulf. I wonder if the Saudis or one of the Emirates have planes with Syrian markings. I wouldn't put it past them to use a chemical attack against a town if they thought they could blame Assad for it. The practical limitations are probably untenable though. Planes flying from the gulf would have to go with the blessing of either Iraq, Jordan or Israel or they would have to fly undetected through one of these countries or the eastern Mediterranean sea. I'm assuming that they don't have planes in the region; I think the Russians would have destroyed any. Also, you'd have to think at some point the façade would come crashing down. I don't believe anything the Russians, the Iranians or the Syrians say about much of anything. But in this conflict I don't really take what western media says without a grain of salt either. Pretty much everything is blamed on the regime and nobody seems to look very hard to find the truth about anything. As horrible as this chemical attack, which was probably perpetrated by units loyal to if not controlled by Assad, we should understand that we in the west and our ultra-autocratic allies in the region have played a major role in keeping this conflict alive for the last five years. I don't know that there is any way to wind this down at this point, but to some extant we should be looking in the mirror when we apportion blame.
    1
  782. It's a beautiful list with some noticeable absences, it should have been a top fifty. If you're going to do Meatloaf you probably should've done "Two Outta Three Ain't Bad". It's criminal not to include "Beth" by Kiss, and although nobody's familiar with it, my personal number one power ballad is Slade's "C'est la Vie (And the Last Waltz)". Oh and "Every Rose Has Its Thorn" should be number one or two, not four. I agree with the commentator that said "Purple Rain" should be here somewhere. The rest of the list is pretty much on though I wouldn't have thrown in a Bon Jovi tune, but that's a personal bias, I just don't like the guy.
    1
  783. I'm pleased to see solar cells getting so light. You could plaster them over the surface of a dirigible and you'd have a fuel free airship that would be practical for freight and passenger service.
    1
  784. One could argue that Bernie didn't come through with the progressive vote when it mattered. If Sanders and Warren are going to exercise power in the name of Progressives then the Progressives have to show up when they're needed. Most Democrats right now are disgusted with the progressive wing, rightly or wrongly. Had the Progressives delivered in the election the power of Sanders and Warren would probably be much better felt in the new Congress. If Progressives want power they're going to have to deliver. They should start in 2018.
    1
  785. My admiration for Washington is not related to pronouncements of enlightenment that he failed to live up to. The man was a mediocre commander, a corrupt land speculator, of course a slave-holder. What Washington did do is throw his support behind Hamilton's establishment of government revenue acquisition programs after the country fought a war against taxes. His presence and his selective use of his hero status was largely responsible for keeping the realists of the day politically powerful enough to counter the populists coming out of Virginia. This brought balance to our factions keeping us from spiraling into a single party state and it allowed us to set the groundwork for our early entry into the industrial revolution. And of course everybody recognizes the gift of precedent he set by refusing to run for a third term (Few recognize the gift of precedent set by John Adams of voluntarily stepping down after losing an election to a hated rival). For a look at the United States without Washington, see the early histories of most other American countries right after their wars of independence.
    1
  786. The problem with Eva Bartlett is that when she constantly refers to the insurgents as terrorists it makes her sound like she's spouting pro-Government propaganda. It doesn't matter if she's presenting the truth — those with sympathies for the insurgents or antipathies for the regime are going to dismiss her as long as she uses that language.
    1
  787. An American president would seal a peace treaty between Israel and the guy who just signed a peace treaty with Iran and put his country into BRICS? I'm sorry, I don't see it.
    1
  788.  @sp-gu5wn  I'm sorry. I'm not sure I understand your point. Please elaborate.
    1
  789.  @thearmchairyoutuber8669  Yes, as did the Japanese in 1905. I didn't say it couldn't be done, just that I don't think they are as weak as everyone else does.
    1
  790. I hope you're timing an EU vs UK scenario for next March.
    1
  791. The reverse is true as well. Russians are concerned that a pause would just allow Ukrainians to acquire and train on more western weapons.
    1
  792. Some are appalled by the use of pubic funds, others point out that it's not that much of a percentage of our overall budget. It depends mainly on their political slant.
    1
  793. China's trying to make sure they have control of their land and people, just like any other country would.
    1
  794. What kind of moron doesn't consider a tariff to be a tax?
    1
  795. Oh, right. I forgot.
    1
  796. Hong Kong is not a Chinese colony. It is a Chinese city.
    1
  797. The difference between dog people and cat people is that dog people can tolerate stupid over evil while cat people can tolerate evil over stupid.
    1
  798. It is also subject to dogma, at least in the short term.
    1
  799.  @daniellesomerfield8799  Jesus said a lot of things.
    1
  800. Canada should fight for the life of its citizen, especially considering that Canada eliminated the death penalty within its jurisdiction in 1999. That's not to suggest that the guy doesn't deserve it. But Canada would not execute a Chinese citizen who commits a crime, so they have, in my opinion, an argument that China shouldn't execute one of theirs.
    1
  801.  @至上理智  That is definitely the Chinese perspective; I was describing the Canadian perspective. No country can effectively keep all its citizens from committing crimes. But I think a country should still try to save their citizens' lives even when they do commit such an atrocity. That doesn't mean that the other country should just acquiesce. China should respond that they have laws and that they apply to everyone equally. I am a death penalty opponent and I wish that China didn't have the death penalty, but if they catch a foreigner breaking their laws in their country than it's a perfectly legitimate argument to say that they are getting what's coming to them. Once these positions are articulated, then it's time to talk and try to figure out what ultimate result is best for the two countries involved.
    1
  802. It's interesting that four of the last five presidential elections and five of the last seven have gone to the less competent major party candidate in the general.
    1
  803. I think China could pretty much blow off UK sanctions. China cares about the United States, the European Union, and a little bit of Russia. Other individual countries' acceptance is nice, and worth pursuing, but not necessary. Of course a sufficiently large bloc of countries acting together might get their attention, but rogue isolationist countries aren't going to carry enough weight.
    1
  804.  @Roust7  One of the problems with anti-socialist criticism is that so many liberals and capitalists portray Marxism/Communism/Socialism as a static ideology that has to follow Marxism (or in some views Stalinism) to the letter. What the Chinese have done is to start with Marxism and adopt the Leninist changes that made it appropriate to an agrarian society and then to evolve it further to match the needs of China in the real world of international trade. The flexibility of the Chinese government is what makes it work. China takes what it needs from Marx, Lenin, Mao, Deng and Adam Smith and forgets about the orthodoxy.
    1
  805. So your contention is that the Great Game is over?
    1
  806. Korea could unite, but it would be in the face of opposition from both the United States and China, which makes it really difficult. I think if North and South Korea did decide to do it, it would have to be fast, they'd have to insist that American troops leave, and, in order to maintain their independence at the crossroads of superpowers, they'd have to keep and maintain their nuclear arsenal.
    1
  807.  @rejvaik00  Actually, I think they couldn't go after the hard-core communists. Unification would have to mean amnesty, at least in the near term. They're also going to have to find a way to incorporate the Kim family into the power structure somehow. My suggestion would be a Constitutional Monarchy with the government structure of the South left more-or-less intact with some extra seats in the Diet for the northern provinces. They probably should commit to building Kim Jong Un an over-the-top palace to compare with the Emperor's in Japan—essentially buy him off of real power and promise to protect his dynasty.
    1
  808.  @meloniesburgerplace1558  I didn't say it was likely. The hardest part about it would be getting the North Korean regime and the North Korean leader specifically to give up most of their power. They would have to be offered a pretty sweet pot. You'd almost certainly have to have a blanket amnesty, and I don't think there would be any chance reunification if the North Korean leader can't remain as titular Head of State with a great palace in Seoul. You would probably need to keep the personality cult intact to some degree, by which I mean keeping the symbolism of the north like the flag, the official name of the country, the military uniforms, and the holidays celebrating the birthdays of the founder and the current leader and other historical dates. There probably would have to be a law making it illegal to defame the family or the dynasty, and you'd have to guarantee that Kim Il-Sun would be honored and taught in schools as the father of the country, and the current leader at the time of reunification would have to be forever credited as the country's unifier. You could offer personal security (eliminating the fratricide), and a promise to make sure the family stays wealthy and well promoted. And while this all sounds distasteful to those of us who don't have a lot of respect for the North Korean regime, it certainly is a price worth paying for a peaceful reunification under the current conditions of government, economics and society, more-or-less, currently experienced in the ROK.
    1
  809.  @hmm2598  I saw an interview with a Chinese gentleman who's probably in his seventies now. I can't remember if he's an entrepreneur or an engineer, but he's quite successful. When he was in his twenties he was sent to Shaanxi Province to do some sort of impossible job, this during the Cultural Revolution. He was starving but the narrative at the time left him with the assumption that all the other countries in the world were far poorer than China, and that he was lucky to have it so good. My point is that people can get used to a better life. This guy recognized and even illustrated the lie that he had bought into in his youth but he still loves his country and he works every day to make it a better place to be. I think the North Koreans can do the same.
    1
  810.  @anonymity7336  Reunification will cause a lot of short term pain. I understand that reality. But Korea's geography puts it in a position where strength is absolutely necessary for independence and protecting Korean interests. In the long run it is definitely in Korea's best interest to reunify mostly under the South Korean model. If Koreans don't want to be pawns on the chessboard, they'll need to get over those short-term fears. United they'll stand strong, divided they'll always be dependent on the kindness of their superpower neighbors. I for one would not want to be dependent on the good will of some other ambitious state.
    1
  811. I don't know. If he still gets a Fed appointment in there that is any kind of incompetent or sycophantic then I don't think he's fired enough.
    1
  812.  @junkscience6397 I can't remember what AI looked like in 1974.
    1
  813.    Yeah, you might be right. Maduro's support may be close to nothing among the people at this point. I'm just not sure who to trust with that assessment. From what I understand he still has the support of the military and that's not inconsequential. I'm not an advocate of Maduro though I don't like Guaido much either. I know Venezuela has suffered under Maduro's mismanagement but I don't think the current approach is a good solution. I hope the best for the Venezuelan people but I think the rest of the world is just trying to aggravate the misery in hopes that somehow a good pro-western regime will emerge from the inevitable chaos. At this point it's just sad. I have a hard time seeing a light at the end of the tunnel here.
    1
  814.  @BlazeXkilla  That's kind of my point. I don't really know what to believe. I'm not a fox viewer (I do have some standards) but I'm not sure any other media outlets are reliable either in this regard.
    1
  815. Maybe…
    1
  816. So produce more and export more? How can you get the kind of investment necessary to pull that off? Well, there's always the BRI.
    1
  817. The Chinese had a huge role in the defeat of Japan, second (maybe) to the U.S. role only.
    1
  818.  @yourhuckleberry6757  What the hell are you talking about?
    1
  819. I'm sure you have your reasons.
    1
  820.  @earlhickey1557  I think you hit the nail on the head with "…even i knew with almost no resources but little research." A little information is a dangerous thing.
    1
  821. It would still be super controversial because of the invasive nature of transplant surgery. Unless our standards change radically I doubt a woman could be coerced into going through with the operation.
    1
  822. The American position is not one of solidarity within the country. Trump, and many of his supporters, see European free riders under the American security umbrella as a net loss and may advocate for the abandonment of our NATO allies, but the other side, and this includes the security apparatus, see it as a price worth paying to have European support on global issues, even issues that are not working in Europe's favor. Having the Germans turn off the Russian gas spickett so that they have to purchase American LNG at a much higher price probably wouldn't fly if the United States weren't guaranteeing their defense. We certainly wouldn't be able to keep them from looking too deeply into the destruction of the pipelines they built if this weren't the case. The American security umbrella may be expensive, but it does have its political dividends.
    1
  823.  @thediversifier1739  I think the truth lies between your description and ART DECO's. Most American cities would tolerate a couple day's city-wide protests but after about a week I think the hammer would come down. At some point between a week and a month depending on the city and the state that the city is located in you'd probably see National Guard troops brought in to help enforce a peace. The United States would be very reluctant to bring in the regular Army for legal, historical, and political reasons and I think anything short of a city openly seceding or completely engulfed in chaos would fail to bring regular military participation. One wildcard in the United States is the proliferation of firearms. It's much more likely that an American confrontation between activists and police lasting five months would involve one or more shootouts simply because both sides would have the equipment to engage at that level. I suspect that if some of these cocktail tossers in Hong Kong had guns that there would have been real casualties by now, again on both sides.
    1
  824. The CCP was unhelpful through the seventies, but China was "ruined" long before they got involved. From the Opium Wars of 1840 through the Cultural Revolution which ended with Mao's death in 1976 China suffered calamity after calamity at the hands of corrupt and/or incompetent Chinese governments (Late Qing Imperial, Taiping, Republican, Warlord, Communist) and abusive foreign governments (Western, Japanese) which created chaos and led to the widespread poverty of the average Chinese. Since the reign of Deng, that trend has been reversed, poverty has been steadily declining and the lives of the Chinese people have been steadily improving. All indications are that this will continue going forward for the foreseeable future.
    1
  825.  Jo Black  The CCP losing control would be disastrous for the people of China and the people of China are well aware of that fact. The criticism about the conspiracy theory blaming the U.S. for planting the virus is warranted though. Nobody should be floating conspiracy theories right now. It's not helpful in the least.
    1
  826.  @RandallJamesPeterson  Yes, and good companies wouldn't have that short-term market disadvantage versus lousy companies, at least as far as healthcare costs were concerned.
    1
  827. China's a complicated country with a lot of complicated issues. I'm glad you can appreciate that. You definitely should not take everything that I say as fact; I am definitely a sinophile and I can get very worked up when I think China's being unfairly maligned. Nonetheless, China is frequently unfairly maligned. As for China Uncensored, it is operated by the Falun Gong which is at war with the Chinese government. Not everything they say is a lie, but they definitely are grinding an axe so take it with a pound of salt.
    1
  828.  @pseudotatsuya  My point is that the Chinese are succeeding with this because they are focusing on it and allocating resources towards it. I don't doubt that they got some of their tech through espionage but there is still a lot of credit due to vision and execution.
    1
  829. What kind of action do you think could resolve the situation at this point? I'm seriously asking, not trying to dismiss you.
    1
  830. America has many human rights issues from over-incarceration to institutional racism to operation of extrajudicial prison facilities, most noticeably the prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Because we do have these human rights issues we come across as hypocritical when we admonish others. That being said, we are nowhere near the worst abusers of human rights. We are not expelling a religious minority like Myanmar. We are not legally requiring women to cover their hair in public like Iran or forbidding it like France. We are not publicly beheading or stoning those involved in crimes of passion like Saudi Arabia and our opposition journalists do not keep showing up dead (admittedly I don't know if the state is involved in the murder of Russian journalists but it doesn't look good). I'm generally reluctant to criticize other countries unless it's out of control in part because I understand the hypocrisy. I also am aware that just because some local government officials in another country pulled some messed up crap doesn't mean it's necessarily an issue with the whole country. And while I do admit that we in the U.S. definitely need to clean up our act regarding human rights, I feel like you should understand that we are nowhere near the top of the list of abusers.
    1
  831. The Russian army in Finland was very disorganized, being the first major conflict the Russians actively participated in since their revolution. There was an ongoing debate about whether soldiers in a people's army should even have rank. They got that sorted out by the time the Germans invaded. If Ukraine has the kind of winter that Poland had in '39, then that would clearly work in favor of the defenders. We'll have to see what the planet decides to dish out.
    1
  832. @Leo Jansen In fairness, we all do that.
    1
  833. @Leo Jansen Yeah, I'm sure you're better than the rest of us.
    1
  834.  @America938  India has other problems. China's future looks brightest, but nothing is for sure.
    1
  835.  @starbase218  It can gain you respect, the same way that pulling out a gun in an argument gains you respect. It's unlikely to gain you good will.
    1
  836.  @starbase218  You do if you're in the room with them. No, I get what you're saying that you don't think much of people who resort to violence, but you have to respect their ability to harm you (or someone you care about), the same way you respect a bear or the ocean. If you don't respect that capacity, then you are likely to get hurt or worse.
    1
  837.  @starbase218  I know that we can be obtuse. We're very good at believing our own hype which has led us to making some very insensitive decisions in the world. Because of our strength those decisions have led to a lot of pain worldwide. As Americans, the blood is on our hands, whether we want to notice it or not. Setting all that aside, like any society we have our virtues and our vices. One of our greatest vices is our exceptionalist view of ourselves. You referenced the "greatest country in the world" trope. We are a great country, but we definitely have our peers. I've only been to China, Korea and Canada outside the United States. I don't think we are categorically better than any of those countries. They certainly felt every bit as great as the United States when I was there. None of them are as powerful as the United States (Though China's getting close), but I think that's a different argument. I love the United States, I love being an American and I generally don't dodge bullets walking down the street, at least not on weekdays. I'm quite proud to be an American, even if I'm sometimes ashamed of some of the things we do. I do try to respect other countries and the people that live and/or originate from them. This can mean respecting the patriotism of citizens of countries taking actions that I'm not entirely on board with. It also means empathizing with all those being hurt, whether that's Ukrainians watching their homes and families perish in front of them, Russian soldiers walking through a town wondering which of these civilians is suddenly going to pull out a rifle, European townsfolk wondering how they're going to heat their homes this coming winter, Yeminis trying to navigate another year of hellish chaos, Libyans risking a Mediterranean crossing in a plastic tub, Rohingya hiding in the jungle to avoid the next massacre, Sri Lankans in need of medicine that's not coming, Haitians beaten like cattle by U.S. border patrol cowboys, Ethiopians staring famine in the face. Now I've forgotten what my original argument was. I do think we can do better, but we probably won't. I know we've all got challenges of one degree or another approaching. Maybe someday we'll get better at working together rather than trying to promote our agenda by intimidating each other. Until then, Good Luck.
    1
  838.  @joemikey278  Despite what you, I or anyone else wants, China is not going to "succeed with freedom and human rights" beyond the reproach of critics until it has a more comfortable grip on the parts of the country that were compromised during its weak period from 1839-present, during which time Xinjiang, Tibet, Mongolia, Hong Kong, Macau and later Taiwan were separated to various degrees politically from the Chinese government. So long as there are semi-credible secession movements in any of these or any other Chinese location then the Chinese government will not be able to comfortably relax its grip on the people. This will be the case regardless of which kind of ideology the government follows. No concept is more important to China, and this includes the great majority of Chinese people, than imperial integrity. So long as the government is viewed as strong and relatively uncorrupt than the people will stand behind it. And frankly, a strong, secure, centralized autocracy is better for the Chinese people than a weak and chaotic democracy. China may someday become a democracy. China may never become a democracy. If they do it will be in their own time and pushing them from outside is doing them no favors.
    1
  839.  @joemikey278  Thank you for the compliment and keep writing, your perspective is valued.
    1
  840. @In Cell How many voted for Trump?
    1
  841. @In Cell Looks like they devolved.
    1
  842.  @Harthorn  Not uncommon in history.
    1
  843.  @pgr3290  I could be mistaken, but I don't see Koreans viewing China as a threat, especially as China has been reaching out to them over the last few decades. Koreans have far greater animosity towards Japan than they do China and the only reason South Korea has as close a relationship as it does with the United States is because the U.S. has troops stationed in Korea in the event of an attack by the DPRK. I think China has grown as close to South Korea as it has to North Korea and deep down I think they respect South Korea a lot more. It's possible that the U.S. could try to force South Korea into an anti-China alliance, and that might succeed, but it could also backfire. Many in South Korea understand that the United States may be there (in northeast Asia) now, but China will be there forever.
    1
  844.  @voltagedrop5899  The PLAN is not a joke. It is probably the second most capable navy in the world. It is nowhere near a match for the U.S. Navy now but over time it will very likely close the gap. If the United States flooded troops into the eastern side of the island than it could probably keep the PLA at bay at this time. The question is, does the United States want to keep Taiwan out of the PRC more than the PRC wants to bring it in because if the PRC bets the farm on military reunification then the cost of thwarting them will be brutal.
    1
  845.  @lamb-mz2sd  You are absolutely correct. I was oversimplifying, but the broader question still stands, what's it all worth versus what's it gonna cost?
    1
  846.  Green Earth  They're not CIA funded, they're Falun Gong.
    1
  847.  @bsmithhammer  What's your vision regarding the future in the non-Western world?
    1
  848. They're not. They just feel like they have to respond in some similar fashion in order to not be seen as happily taking it in the backside. China's responses are never as harsh as Trump's aggressions; they're just waiting him out until someone comes into office that they can actually work with.
    1
  849.  @guodunniu  His best future is to go back and face justice and just move on from there. But that's really a hard decision to make knowing how painful justice can be. Fortunately he's only thirty and not fifty and he has time to have a life afterwards.
    1
  850. Elon Musk is many things—some of them not so wonderful—but I don't think he's a con artist. I think he makes every attempt to deliver on his promises.
    1
  851. A Democratic Socialist party would be a massive spoiler. Republicans would win every swing election, including all presidential elections. In the face of that the Democrats and the Democratic Socialists would have to form coalitions just to be a relevant minority in Congress and in most state legislatures, so they still wouldn't effectively be separate, just extremely weak. I'm talking even weaker than the Democrats are now.
    1
  852. In my foolish optimism I still hold out hope that unification can occur without violence. It would certainly be the best option for the people of China, Taiwan, the United States and the rest of the world.
    1
  853.  @evilchili4787  The culture in Taiwan is Chinese. The political systems are different, but if the people of Taiwan want to preserve their right to a democracy at the provincial level, they have a much better chance at negotiating that then they do at defending it militarily.
    1
  854.  @evilchili4787  China lived up to their end of the Hong Kong deal, both the one in the 1820s and the one in the 1980s—this despite the fact that they never acknowledged Britain's right to set terms in either "deal".
    1
  855.  @evilchili4787  They vet the candidates, which is not prohibited in the handover agreement but it is usually what "pro-democracy" demonstrators don't like. "…what's to stop them from doing that same thing to Taiwan?" They probably would vet candidates to make sure that they are not secessionists. But as for further interference beyond what is negotiated, just a promise. Nothing can guaranty that the central government wouldn't "go back on their word." but there's a good chance that they wouldn't so long as no culture of sedition arises. The alternative is to get curb-stomped in a hot war which leads to an environment reminiscent of a hostile occupation similar to what Japan suffered immediately after the end of World War Two where the political system is dictated by hard-liners.
    1
  856.  @evilchili4787  Well, they are part of China. I just see two roads ahead for Taiwan. One road leads to death, massive suffering, and total loss of any kind of local control of their government for a generation or more. The other road is much less certain. It's based on what can be negotiated and which negotiated terms are honored. I get that you don't trust the central government. I think in the long run the governance of special zones like Hong Kong, Macau, and, if the second road is taken, Taiwan, will probably evolve to match the rest of China, whatever that looks like in the future, but it does give these areas some time to integrate with some of their peculiarities. It also gives them a chance influence the rest of the country and respectfully promote the values that they want to see preserved over time. The choice of which road to take is ultimately going to depend on the people of Taiwan, but I don't realistically see another road.
    1
  857.  @IloveDoubleD  They're not really trying to stop demonstrations in Hong Kong and while they may very well be able to take Taiwan in a scenario where the US military is overstretched I'd be shocked if they did any time in the next two decades. By and large their military capacity, global economic influence and political heft are all improving and likely to continue so. Time is on China's side and I think they'll hold off until they feel like a victory is assured (or maybe at the hundred year anniversary of the founding of the PRC).
    1
  858.  @adamorick2872  Lesson number one: take what a country's expats say with a sizable grain of salt.
    1
  859.  @marjanp  Don't think it's gonna happen, but if it did it would be for two reasons: a) to regain global prestige, and b) to allegedly protect the Russian-speaking minorities within those countries.
    1
  860. @Dale Gribble Of course the United States also had allies like the Soviet Union, the British Empire and the Republic of China. While the U.S. played a pivotal role in the defeat of the axis powers, the bulk of the human casualties were borne by the Russians and the Chinese.
    1
  861.  @Harmony867  African countries don't have to reject Chinese claims on Taiwan to get along with America.
    1
  862. German synchronization was indigenous (if being designed by a German hired Dutchman counts as indigenous). The British plane that had a front-mounted machine gun that shot through the propeller that was captured had no synchronization. It had iron plated bolted to the propeller blades which the bullets ricocheted off of when they hit.
    1
  863.  @gregoryjones2457  You're right, I failed to mention Koxinga. You could draw a lot of parallels between his rule of Taiwan and the current Republican rule of Taiwan. There again though, it was less than a lifetime.
    1
  864.  @billkrebaum  I apologize if I misconstrued your intentions. I don't really have an argument with historians, but rather those with no proper historical understanding. As Peter Sellers showed us, people hear what they want to hear (myself included) and ignore the evidence in front of them. I'm sorry if I've put you off, I hope you won't abandon discussions because of rubes like me. I do appreciate you "Being There".
    1
  865.  @michaelkatz275  Here's the thing. Mexico lost that war. The people of the American southwest weren't necessarily interested in becoming Americans in the 1830s and 1840s, but the United States victory in Mexico City took that choice away from them. If China wins a war (and yes, that is a big if, though it gets ever smaller with time) in Taiwan than those living in Taiwan will have no choice but to be part of the PRC.
    1
  866.  @michaelkatz275  First of all, the Anglo Texans of the day were given cheap land by the Mexican government with the understanding that they would be good Mexican citizens. When these beneficiaries stabbed Mexico in the back and started agitating for independence the Mexican government took action. The same thing could happen in Taiwan. As for the events in Xinjiang, the sources for that information couldn't be more dubious. They boil down to Adrien Zenz, an anti-Chinese millennialist who works for Victims of Communism, an agency that has as its primary goal the destruction of China and other communist regimes, the World Uighur Congress, a separatist organization that parades a handful of "victims" around on speaking tours with ever-evolving stories and is funded heavily by the National Endowment for Democracy, an agency whose purpose is to fund clandestine operations targeting our global peers, and ASPI, an exceptionally hawkish Australian think tank that derives all of its funding by arms manufacturers. Does this mean that there aren't human rights abuses in Xinjiang? No, it doesn't. It just means there is no decent evidence for wide spread human rights abuses coming anywhere near the threshhold one would assume that a term like genocide would require. There are, or at least there were, reeducation centers in Xinjiang. But not every building with a wall around it is a reeducation center. In fact, walled enclosures are as common in China as hurricane fences are in the United States. The idea that there were enough reeducation centers to house a million or more individuals is completely unsupported by facts on the ground. The purpose of the reeducation centers that were in operation were to deradicalize and provide vocational education to at-risk individuals in Xinjiang. I'll except that the compulsory nature of the programs brings rise to legitimate human rights questions, but there is no evidence that these programs were used to de-ethnicize or eradicate Uighurs or any other ethnic group in Xinjiang. And there is not a scintilla of evidence for forced labor among UIghurs who might be in or may have graduated from these reeducation programs. One company, Sketchers, did a detailed investigation of their supply lines in China including those that stretched into Xinjiang and determined that there was no evidence to support claims of forced labor at any point along the chain. If Taiwan wants to point to Xinjiang as a reason not to reunify then they are doing so in bad faith. They may have reasons for not wanted to reunify, but Xinjiang is not a valid one.
    1
  867. Ukraine is a pawn, like all small countries growing in the shadows of great powers. Ukraine is stuck in the middle and must find a way to accommodate both Europe and Russia in order to prosper.
    1
  868.  @Ashphinchtersayswhat  Never lived there, but my longest visit was a month. Still, I think your point is valid at least as it pertains to me. There's no way I could truly know China in the short times that I've been there. I do have family there though that have lived their entire lives there.
    1
  869.  @香料國境  In Zhengzhou, a city of 12 million people, there were according to an NPR program on July 25th, sixty-three deaths associated with the floods. The rainfall was over two feet in the course of three days. That's the amount of rain that normally falls on Zhengzhou in one year. While each death is tragic and I don't want to in any way minimize those lost lives, the casualty rate is much lower than I would have expected for a city that size dealing with a catastrophe of this magnitude. I think this is a tribute to the efforts of the city's planners and builders as well as to the responders and the residents who stepped up to take care of each other during this crisis. Anecdotally I've heard that things are getting back to normal as the clean-up proceeds. I'm not sure how the less urban areas affected by the rains have fared so I don't think I should comment on that at this time.
    1
  870.  @transsylvanian9100  I don't want to cut on the Germans either. Natural disasters are terrible no matter where they occur and though I don't really feel like I'm in much of a position to help, I hope I can at least not exacerbate the problem by using the disaster to undermine a particular society whether or not I agree with the government. It doesn't matter who was worse. What matters is that we support those affected as best we can. At least that's what I think. Thanks for your supporting words though.
    1
  871.  @transsylvanian9100  Best wishes to you and your community. I hope you can recover quickly.
    1
  872.  @leavesinautumn5959  If you're in Washington there is no ideal solution. So long as some Kurds are calling for a separate state that includes part of what is now Turkey than Turkey cannot permit a separate Kurdish state anywhere on its periphery. Any Kurdish autonomy would have had to have been protected with an outside troop presence that Turkey respected enough to to avoid antagonizing. This meant that Kurdish autonomy was dependent on a permanent great power presence.
    1
  873.  @leavesinautumn5959  I'm not sure the lesser of two evils is so clearly evident. Human rights violations against the Kurds go back a lot further than Turkey's history as a country. As is the case with many human rights violations, especially the larger scale ones, they're often a response to groups of people throwing rocks at bears and then getting mauled. Turkey can't tolerate Kurdish nationalism in its borders. Syria is determined to re-establish it's borders. These positions are non-negotiable to both the governments and the citizens of these countries. Syria has the backing of the most powerful regional player, Iran, and the most reliable non-regional player, Russia. The only relevant player in the region that isn't bigger and stronger than the Kurdish nationalists is (maybe) Iraq. The best that can be hoped for is territorial agreement between the real players, Turkey, Syria, Iran and Russia, and for the Kurds to negotiate the best relationship they can with these players within that agreement, meaning within those countries. Is this what the Kurds want? No. Do the Kurds deserve their own state? As much as any nation, which again I would say is No.
    1
  874.  @leavesinautumn5959  Yeah, I think we're pretty much on the same page. The best outcome is the end of fighting with as few casualties and as little disruption as possible. If the Kurds are backed up by Syria, Iran and Russia than maybe the Turks ( and more than that the riff-raff that Turkey's injecting into their area) will leave them alone after an initial show of force.
    1
  875. Those who succeed always credit themselves; those that fail always blame someone else. The truth is always in the middle. I think the most salient point was that these guys took a risk and it paid off. For the vast majority of people who take those risks, it doesn't. Of course, it's like the lottery. If you don't play, you can't win. The question is, what are you willing to lose?
    1
  876. Russia always appears to be weaker than they are. Total war is their A-Game, and it always has been. On another note, there is no good reason to assume that patriotism in the United States is more durable than in Russia or China. The concept that Chinese only support their government because of super impressive economic growth is wishful thinking. The Chinese have a keen sense of consequence regarding invasion and if they feel threatened they will show up.
    1
  877. Roshi, everyone has excellent multi-tasking skills when they're young. I'm a gen-xer and I used to do my homework listening to my cd player and watching Gilligan's Island reruns. Ain't happening now. I can barely focus on one task these days. And oh yeah, it takes me a while to pick up on sarcasm too these days.
    1
  878.  @chug-a-lugdoug4638  Your point regarding Israel has some validity although the Israelis are not exactly blameless victims. As to the Iran-Iraq war, it was Iraq that attacked Iran, not the other way around.
    1
  879. This looks more like East Asian unity.
    1
  880. Big country, big problems. At least they're trying to do something about it rather than just throwing up their arms and accepting that their people will have to suffer. Thank God they controlled their population growth, and through a procreation policy rather than through a famine.
    1
  881.  @thetaomega7816  If you are referring to the Great Leap Forward and the famine that was at least in-part a result of those policies, that predated the one-child policy by two decades. Also, China has a history of breeding up to the limit of its food production so that even when it was the most advanced country in the world (which covers most of its history) it was perpetually plagued by famine. This time around, they've taken a more thoughtful approach, to the benefit of the world, and particularly to the benefit of the Chinese people.
    1
  882. As an American I think anyone who's not fleeing from justice should be welcomed here. That would include the vast majority of people coming from Mexico and some of the people coming from Hong Kong. I'm sorry that many of my countrymen have no sense of compassion or hospitality for those trying to escape grinding poverty.
    1
  883.  @barriocubalindo  If I was the author of my country's immigration policies that is exactly what I would do. I'm not entirely on board with your assertion that we've caused all the world's misery but I certainly think we should do whatever we can to alleviate it and I certainly think that we should welcome anyone who wants to come participate in our society, and where possible, ensure safe passage. I have great confidence that America is fundamentally strong enough both economically and culturally to benefit from that kind of infusion and I think it would give us a much better claim to the greatness that we like to describe ourselves with.
    1
  884.  @coldwarrior888  As an agnostic moderate with socialist leanings I welcome and honor conservative Christians who embrace compassion. I wish there were more of you. I also believe, as you suggested, that we have a responsibility to make sure our house is in order and that the general welfare of those living under our flag per se have to be taken care of as a first priority. I say this because I'm an American, a proud one, and I believe that our country is blessed with natural, capital, and human resources to such a degree that no one in our country should be unable to find comfort, purpose and security so long as they are willing to make an honest effort to contribute and participate in our society. This is sometimes referred to as The American Dream. And while that dream has appeared to fade in recent decades, I don't think it's because we no longer have the necessary resources to make it real. We have the ability to house everyone. We have the ability to feed everyone. We even have the ability to entertain everyone. What's assaulting the dream are a lack of vision, a lack of will, and a cruel and non-compassionate distribution system. I know it looks like I'm getting off subject but my point is that we could take care of our own 320 million people if we really wanted to and we worked together to make it happen. We could also absorb far more than double the 1.2 million immigrants that we are taking in annually and still maintain our values (at least the good values) and advance our overall prosperity. Of all the hurdles we have towards progress, immigration is among the least significant, and that's assuming that it's a hurdle at all. Like all investments, there is some up-front cost. But with immigrants there's a huge payoff down the line. In contrast, the costs of rejecting immigrants, denying them timely refuge and opportunity based on their place of birth, are never recovered and often compounded. On top of that, it's evil, despicable in its cruelty, and it should be a huge weight on our collective conscience. It certainly is for anyone who truly is a person of compassion.
    1
  885. I'm not sure how much more land the Russian army is intending on taking. I think it's likely that Russia is hoping to keep pressure on the Ukrainian government to commit to staying out of NATO and to recognizing Crimean annexation and Donbass independence. Russia has established an overland connection to Crimea and they've connected Crimea to the Dnieper River which one would think secures the water supply to the peninsula. I suspect they'll probably try to encircle Ukraine's western armies but I don't know that their objectives go beyond that. They might. It's possible that the Russian government wants to take all of Ukraine, but I doubt it.
    1
  886.  @AEB1066  I'm not sure you are correct in your assessment. I'm not sure you are wrong either, but Russia is not flattening the country, which they could. They're putzing around at the edges of the cities just keeping steady pressure. If their goal is as you stated then they are not using their resources very effectively. They have control of the air and enough mobile armor and artillery to run across the country in formation destroying everything they come in contact with. While that would definitely test their logistical support it shouldn't be that difficult to execute in a battlefield that borders their own country.
    1
  887.  @MrAizatazmi  Not the Red Guard, the Red Army. The Cultural Revolution was later.
    1
  888. I guess I'm wondering why Australians thinks China would attack them over Taiwan. The conflict has nothing to do with Australia.
    1
  889.  @davidbridges3292  "…be it China or Nazi Germany." Huh? Setting aside the insulting hyperbole of associating China with the most reviled regime in modern history, the Third Reich had an expansionary philosophy and agenda based on replacing the existing populations of occupied foreign lands that China simply does not have. China's designs on Taiwan are based on the fact that Taiwan is part of China and has been since the seventeenth century and it does not include any suggestion that those living in Taiwan now should be made to give up their homes. Chinese claims in the SCS are most likely based on the protection of trade routes, particularly through the straits of Malacca, which doesn't threaten any populated land. China simply has no reason to invade Australia or any other country between Australia and itself. I do think that Australia, and any other country, has it in their best interest to look after their own defense and to try to maintain a sufficient military force to do so against any potential enemy, whether that potential enemy be China or the United States. I just think that the suggestion that China is likely to attack Australia over Taiwan is ludicrous. It makes no sense unless what we are really talking about is retaliation because Australia attacks China over Taiwan, but wouldn't that be ridiculous too?
    1
  890. If you want a viable third party it's going to have to take sizable chunks out of both existing parties otherwise it's just a spoiler. The platform that I think would be most likely to succeed would look something like this: Free Trade Pro-Life Anti Death Penalty Pro Education Anti War Anti Racism Anti Poverty Pro Church Anti Union Consumer Protectionist Anti Gay A party like this could break the stranglehold held by the Republicans in the deep south and it would also take much of the minority vote away from the Democrats. It's not a platform I could support, I would definitely remain a Democrat, but it would give people, especially Catholics, Anabaptists, and other non self-righteous Christians, a place where they could vote pro-life and "pro-family" and not throw the rest of their morals in the toilet.
    1
  891. Are you enlisting?
    1
  892. Taiwan's probably got fifteen to twenty-five years to get their affairs in order.
    1
  893. I hope there's a shift going on. Deutsche Welle just put out another Uighur genocide story with no new information and no acknowledgement of the holes in the story, so I'm not sure I'm confident in such a shift.
    1
  894. I doubt either city is for sale.
    1
  895. I love how people "know" stuff that there is no way they could possibly know.
    1
  896.  @Courage2006  No, I just understand that the will of a determined and powerful actor is more influential to actual results than the protestations of the righteous non-powerful one when they are in conflict. It's sometimes referred to as realism.
    1
  897.  @Jagonath  It would probably be termed a liberation from American dominance. I agree that it wouldn't be an actual liberation. It would be a reconciliation though and I think that within a generation or two it would be totally accepted.
    1
  898. Tactically the U.S. will "win" because it will suffer less from this trade war in the short run than China will. The amount of export goods moving from China to the United States will be reduced if either they can be re-sourced from another country with a lower cost (cheaper labor, lower tariffs, lower quality production) or produced in the United States at a lower cost without overly substantial initial investment. After all, investors aren't going to want to invest in an expensive production facility if the tariffs are likely to disappear in five-to-ten years. So yes, there will be some short-term job creation but the cost of living will be higher and efforts to improve the cost of living through wage increases will drive those jobs right back overseas. From a long-term strategy point of view, this is bitter medicine for China but it will leave them with a more diverse trade structure making the United States less influential in China and in the rest of the world compared to China. China was already expanding its trade and political networks globally through the BRI; this will only make that initiative more vital in the eyes of Chinese planners.
    1
  899. If Turkey is going to be anywhere near this ambitious in Europe than they are going to need to ramp up their industry considerably. Being caught between Russia and a German-centered Europe, their really not ready to play that game.
    1
  900.  @abdullahmoh3031  That was kind of my point.
    1
  901. I don't know about this. Maintaining a blockade is difficult. And as we've seen with the U.S.'s sanctions, cutting off trade just makes a country double-down on self-sufficiency. I think that there is a lot we won't know until it happens. I think the ability for both sides to protect their warships is going to be sorely tested. This affects both blockaders and blockade-runners—surface ships and submarines. If there is a naval war around Taiwan it will be like nothing we've seen before, and I don't think I can reliably predict a victor, nor do I think anyone else can.
    1
  902. I really like your caveat. I feel like too many people caricature Marxism and don't want to let it grow and learn from events of the last century or so. Of course if it can't change over time it will cease to be relevant. Then again, maybe that's the point.
    1
  903.  @TWE_2000  The people of Taiwan will be much better served to peacefully reunite with the mainland. In that scenario they may be able to negotiate some of the things that matter to them most, and avoid a war on their soil in the process. But alas, I agree with you that the BS in Hong Kong has made that path extremely unlikely.
    1
  904.  @TWE_2000  I guess it's a matter of values. If the people of Taiwan feel like a few years of provincial independence is worth a bloody war, the post-war slaughter of those who advocated for independence, and a few decades of seriously hardcore repression in an effort to root out any inkling of separatism when the alternative is a gradual and relatively painless reintegration into the most dynamic economy on the globe without leveled cities or the aftermath of a global cold war structure that leaves them unable to trade or travel in the West, then yeah it's worth maintaining their independence for a little while.
    1
  905. This was always a choice of least bad options for Russia. NATO had been creeping towards the Russian border since 1989, actually reaching the border in 2003 with the inclusion of the Baltic states. The rubber hit the road in 2014 when Yanukovich was ousted in a coup and Russia's lease on its largest Black Sea port in Sevastopol became at risk of not only being lost to the Russian navy, but becoming an asset for NATO. This made annexation of Crimea a necessity, which Russia executed in that same year. Crimea does not have sufficient fresh water to support its population and agriculture requirements, so when Ukraine threatened to cut Crimea off, Russia moved to secure the region between the Dnieper River and the peninsula. Russia also pursued a more aggressive ambition through the rest of Ukraine that failed because of some misjudgments, previously unexposed corruption, and also because of effective Ukrainian defenses. There does appear to be a movement within the U.S. intelligence community to actively diminish Russian power, and the war in Ukraine is largely a fight against that movement. Unfortunately the people of Ukraine are the pawns in that chess game.
    1
  906.  Bradley Scott  I don't think China can depend on Russia to act as an ally. I think Russia will have two goals. The first is to maximize the weakening of both the United States and China so as to improve Russia's power position relative to the other great powers. The other thing I think is that they will avoid betraying China outright because if China isn't beaten down to the point where they can't recover, Russia doesn't want an angry, vengeful and powerful China on their southern border in the medium-range future. I think Russia will do the bare minimum necessary to support China logistically, but I'd be very surprised to see Russia engage militarily unless they saw China running the score up and they determined that they needed to be counted on the winning side.
    1
  907.  @samg6548  With China and the U.S. beating themselves senseless what would remain would be a world without superpowers in which Russia would have some parity with China and the U.S. militarily and tactical military superiority over Europe, at least until such a time as Europe strengthened their political union to the level of a state. Europe as defined by the Eurodollar would continue to have the top economy in the world followed by Japan. This would most likely be seen as an improvement from Russia's standpoint even though you're right, they would not recover their old superpower status.
    1
  908.  @martingilvray06  With all due respect, and I really mean that, you're being unfairly critical of China. The Belt and Road initiative is a net positive for the world. China is investing in places that the rest of the world has been highly neglectful of. Yes, it is done in large part to increase their global influence, but it is also in part a response to accusations leveled against them for decades that they weren't carrying their weight in global development. Creating islands is highly provocative, but legally it's new territory. No one has really ever done this before outside of some Gulf nations creating resort islands. The greatest claim against them is that other nations claimed the atolls upon which these islands were built, so China is occupying contested territory in order to strengthen their claim. Like I said, it's provocative. Their reasoning for doing this is mostly to protect their shipping lanes. Of course the fact that American allies Korea and Japan share those shipping lanes means that one side's protection is the other side's threat. China does not operate death camps for Christians or anyone else. China has over sixty million practicing Christians and while operating an unauthorized church can get you in trouble in China, it's not going to get you the death penalty. I'm a veteran myself and I am very keen to see China and the United States get along in the future and work together to run the world for the betterment of humanity. Yeah, I know, sissy stuff. But I don't want Americans to die fighting the inevitable. It doesn't have to be like this, and if cooler heads can prevail, we can all have a better future. Engineers—Let Us Try.
    1
  909.  @martingilvray06  I don't know what you're drinking but you probably ought to put the bottle down.
    1
  910.  @martingilvray06  Are you seriously suggesting that western media is covering for China? Western media hates China because China censors their coverage of internal Chinese affairs. If you look at coverage of China from the NYT, the BBC, Deutsche Welle, even Al Jazhera it's heavily slanted, one might say unethically slanted, against China in both the framing of stories as well as the choice of stories themselves, and don't even get me started on Australian media. And no, death camps for Christians is not a little unfair, it's slanderous. Don't get me wrong, I know China has issues, some of them are serious and embarrassing. But China is nothing like the way it's portrayed in American or any other western mainstream media. The West has a beef against China for not collapsing according to Cold War formula and the media has an understandable grudge against China because it doesn't live up to their free-speech standards. Because of this China is maligned at all opportunities.
    1
  911.  @richsackett3423  Remember how back in grade school conflicting emotions led us all to say mean things about the the girls we had a crush on?
    1
  912. Really? Like who?
    1
  913.  @PseudoProphet  Yeah, it means more than the U.S. and Britain.
    1
  914.  @PseudoProphet  Alright, I forgot Australia and their constant China-bashing regime. I haven't seen a lot of criticism from anyone else, maybe the occasional question, but certainly not the accusations leveled by the Trump Administration.
    1
  915.  @PseudoProphet  Most of those citizens don't know a damned thing about China. They've been fed a diet of fear and loathing from scapegoating politicians and ideologically driven media sources for decades and even then most of those citizens don't really care. Scientists are not complaining about China's actions, and neither are most governments. Those that are complaining are doing so to misdirect from their own culpability or to fulfill their ideological agendas.
    1
  916. I'm not sure I agree with you on either point.
    1
  917. I don't think we're seeing the same thing when we look at that picture. But even though he's not grabbing anything it's still sleazy. Of course it was sleazy in a comedic sense because it was a sophomoric joke, which he has admitted and apologized for. Maybe my bar is too low, but I think it was a teachable moment and I think he learned from it and I think we should let it go. As for your second point, it depends on the motivation, which you're assuming is puerile. If he wrote in the scene for a dramatic purpose then it is justified. The production was bawdy by nature and we can argue whether or not that was appropriate but if we start holding actors, writers and other performance specialists accountable for the actions of their characters than your stifling both the artistic talents and the political ambitions of people in that industry. Of course, if he wrote it without production in mind then yes, it would be super sleazy, but I doubt either one of us is in a position to make an informed assumption on that. Yes I am giving Franken the complete benefit of the doubt and yes I am doing that because he is a political ally and someone who I think was doing a phenomenal job as a Senator and I was really upset to see him go. Even with that benefit I do feel like an ethics probe related to his accusations was appropriate and if it turned out that he was guilty of more heinous actions then ceding his seat may indeed have been appropriate, but that never happened.
    1
  918.  @lcg3092  Japan's postwar economy was kickstarted during the Korean Civil War with American investment in supporting industries.
    1
  919.  @lcg3092  Korea was fairly industrialized when it was part of Japan. Of course it was devastated by the Civil War and in 1953 South Korea was the poorest country in the world. It helped a lot in the aftermath though that they had institutions (including chaebol families) either in place or at least in recent memory which had industrial experience and was capable of following the authoritarian military leadership into a resurgent industrial reality.
    1
  920.  @lcg3092  No problem. Korea's history is fascinating and complex, and even a lot of Koreans don't want to bring up all aspects of the time of occupation. It can have a bit of a pythonesque feel to it. "What have the Romans ever done for us"
    1
  921. China's all growed up now. They've left the nest and they don't need us anymore.
    1
  922. If only!
    1
  923.  @formworksucks  I don't doubt it. The question is, what if it escalates?
    1
  924. So long as you're in the majority.
    1
  925.  @wengwang5361  The west wants to marginalize Russia and friends, but they want to do it without getting bloody. The west's position is pretty strong, but it's not as strong as it used to be. Other countries are learning how to get by with western pressure constantly pushing down on them. The countries that couldn't handle it have, more or less, succumbed through coups and revolutions.
    1
  926. This is why Republicans are in power. Circular firing squad.
    1
  927. "I wouldn't call the Russians' bluff"—that's because you don't think like a chest-thumping idiot. Our presidential election this year (USA) is almost certainly going to be between two chest-thumping idiots. The only difference (foreign-policy-wise) is that one of them has a man-crush on Putin, and he might not call Russia's bluff because of that.
    1
  928. Al Gore was a veteran, I mean a real veteran. I'm not sure the country cares.
    1
  929.  @abraham2172  They're economically powerful enough to secure good trade terms. I don't know if that power is strong enough to shape policy in third countries. I may be selling them short. They might have the power, but not the focus of will because of their consensus-mandated structure.
    1
  930.  @abraham2172  It's a lot more likely to change if they consolidate their sovereignty into a central state. Sorry, I was just dreaming there.
    1
  931.  @timothylyons5686  World War Two started when the Japanese invaded Manchuria.
    1
  932.  @timothylyons5686  I was under the impression that the Germans were pretty candid about their history regarding the war and the years leading up to it. Am I mistaken?
    1
  933.  @timothylyons5686  That's interesting. Thanks for letting me know.
    1
  934. The Taiwanese people are going to be the biggest losers in this conflict long term. The chances of avoiding a costly siege and occupation are slipping away with every day.
    1
  935. The Straits of Malacca is the most problematic chokepoint in the world. Because of this, everybody's behaving badly. China is determined to control access to the straits so that nobody can blockade their trade. They don't trust the United States (why would they?) or any of their allies. Of course, if China has control of the straits that leaves Japan, Korea, Vietnam and the Philippines at China's mercy. Nobody trusts a China that's not counterbalanced by the United States, so the East Asian countries can't afford to cooperate with China to expel the United States from the SCS. China feels like they can't show any weakness regarding territorial claims. Most other actors in the region are unwilling to show any movement in their claims, lest China takes advantage. I don't know if China feels as strongly about the SCS as they do about Taiwan. I have my doubts, but I could be mistaken. I know they'll never give up on Taiwan, but I think an arrangement could be made with other southeast Asian countries on management of the seas once Taiwan is retaken, but it would have to be part of an image of Chinese magnanimity, which might be more than the other countries could stomach.
    1
  936. I'd say that if it can be proven they gave the order or should have known than yes, they should be disqualified. In the absence of such proof I think that so long as they are cooperating with investigators they should still be eligible for office.
    1
  937.  @danames5780  I suspect he is, but in the absence of proof his eligibility to hold office should remain intact. If proof is forthcoming, then that's a different story.
    1
  938.  @danames5780  I wasn't talking about Trump. I was talking about this Congressional candidate from North Carolina. I'm sorry if I misunderstood you.
    1
  939. At this point I've seen no evidence the Communist Party had anything to do with this, and I don't think you have either. They may or may not be involved, but it's more likely that gangsters are doing this because the protests have become bad for the businesses they lean on and the police have been ineffective at stopping them.
    1
  940.  @AshutoshNandanceo  I think the municipal elections clearly showed that the majority of Hong Kong residents support the protesters to some degree, or at least sympathize with them versus the Hong Kong government.
    1
  941. The story does sound fishy and DW tends to be very aggressive towards China generally. I was relieved to hear that it wasn't an ancient statue. Do you know if the statue was erected illegally.
    1
  942.  @lizhiyang7207  Thanks for the info.
    1
  943. There were road maps in China and Korea that he could have looked at and the nightmare that was Italy at the time. But yeah, nobody in America was taking it seriously until it hit home. The two things I'll give Governors Cuomo, Insley and Newsome are that they should have been able to expect some leadership at the federal that never materialized, and that, once hit, they took it seriously and exercised what authority they had to take care of business.
    1
  944.  @bonehand87  Aside from the fact that China is the only country I'm aware of that ever tried to limit the number of babies being made, the large population of China is a result of 1) centuries of relative abundance due to rice culture, effective social organization, relative peace, and industrial and agricultural innovation during the Yuan, Ming and early Qing periods, and 2) promotion of large families during Mao's period of rule. China may indeed not be the second most economically powerful country in the world—it may be the first, and it matters a lot if you're considering the potential longevity of the state and its governing system. There are definitely concerns about the relationship between the party and the people in China, but I think the same could be said about any country. As for Hong Kong goes, I'm sure they appreciate your heartfelt support; I just hope it doesn't all end in tragedy.
    1
  945. The most effective use of an aircraft carrier is intimidation.
    1
  946. @Lusade Devron Pacific theater, World War Two. Admittedly it was in our own interest and many of our soldiers were not white, but most (Americans) were.
    1
  947. I hope we have better relations with China when Biden gets elected. What we have now is nuts and it isn't helping anybody.
    1
  948. I think that the frightening situation we find ourselves in is that there are some people in the government of the United States that realize that the longer we wait to go to war with China, the less likely we are to succeed in that war. Because of this I think there are people high up in the intelligence community, and maybe a few in the military, who feel like the best thing to do is to goad China into attacking Taiwan now rather than later so that the United States has an excuse to fight now rather than later when odds of success are much worse. The question is, will China rise to the bait? I think China is more-or-less aware of this strategy and I think they are going to avoid open warfare as long as they can. The question is, when Taiwan openly declares independence will China swallow it until the force imbalance is stronger with all the domestic disappointment that this would incur. Or will they risk going to war when the odds of total victory are not as overwhelming as the Chinese would hope for? The one thing the United States is doing successfully is we are making China uncomfortable. As for the way the various wargames are playing out, I'm pretty sure that China could invade Taiwan successfully in the first weeks of combat. They could set up strong beachheads and probably capture some harbors and airports that would give them a strong land presence on the island; they might even conquer the whole island. The US has a 2-1 advantage in combat aircraft numbers though and the Americans would with airfields in Japan, Guam, the Marianas and a half dozen supercarriers operating, probably eventually achieve air superiority, at which point the U.S. military could effectively protect its supply lines into Taiwan and shut off the Chinese (Though if they operate to close to the mainland they'll be at risk of China's superior missile artillery). Then it becomes a production race to see if China can regain air superiority before the PLA is ejected from Taiwan, something that could happen in a relatively short period of time if the PLA didn't secure the whole island or something that could take a long time if the island was secured and the forces in place fought for every inch of ground tooth and nail. My point is that while wargames might show a Chinese victory (occupation of the island) in the short term, the longer term victory could go either way. But even if China loses, they're not going to give up on Taiwan. They'll lick their wounds and come back two decades later with a strong taste for vengeance.
    1
  949. I think jealousy is a very small part of the equation. It has more to do with ideology and privelege. The ideology is political liberalism vs. authoritarianism. Western media outlets believe that authoritarianism is fundamentally unstable and that the ultimate state of society is a liberal democracy. Prior to 1989 westerners in general and western media outlets in particular believed that China was moving towards a liberal democracy. The events at Tiananmen Square completely upended that assumption. Western sensibility, exemplified by its media, was disappointed to the point of devastation. In part this was because of the human tragedy of that event, but beyond that it was because an authoritarian government broke their philosophy, and every success China has is a refutation of that ideology. The other thing that discolors the western press descriptions of China is the fact that China doesn't view the concept of freedom of the press as the kind of inalienable right that western journalists view it as. China controls its messages and it expects resident journalists to follow rules and submit to censorship when the government deems it in the countries interest. Journalists in China are not allowed to run around commenting on anything they want to. Western journalists feel like this environment is unacceptable, largely because they see themselves as superhero champions of the people, able to bring governments down when they get too abusive. This isn't just a journalist thing, it's an editor thing and an industry thing. Journalism attracts people who worship journalism and who want to be superheroes. The industry also rewards journalists who attack their perceived enemies—at the top of the list are governments that don't give journalists free reign to say whatever the hell they want. Of those governments, the Chinese is probably the strongest and the most responsible. Many authoritarian societies deserve everything the western press throws at them. The fact that China is doing right by its people doesn't come into the equation; it's still considered an enemy institution.
    1
  950. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
    1
  951. Two outta three ain't bad.
    1
  952. Can miniature submarines be operated remotely?
    1
  953. That's assuming that Russia will absorb eastern Ukraine. I think it more likely that it will set up a friendly state in eastern Ukraine so that they get their buffer after all.
    1
  954. Blinken's an idiot. He's the worst secretary of state since Pompeo.
    1
  955. You say that failure's not an option. But failure is not an option for the Russians either. Their identity is a lot more at risk than ours is, and the reason they are in the Ukraine in the first place is because they've watched NATO crawl towards them relentlessly over the last thirty years, including into the Baltics and effectively cutting off Kaliningrad. I've heard suggestions that the intent of the United States was to break Russia up. I don't know that this is true, but it's believable, and it's believed in Russia. The Ukrainians are defending their home, of course they have every reason to fight. But the Russians are defending their integrity, and they have reason to fight as well.
    1
  956. We should have closed primaries, it's our frickin' nominee. By the way, it's not very hard to be a Democrat. All you have to do is register. Then you get to mold the party in the image you want, relative to the other Democrats doing the same thing. If you don't want to be on the team then you shouldn't complain about who we choose to lead us.
    1
  957. Wow, that harvester is flyin'.
    1
  958. What kind of hit job were you expecting?
    1
  959. War is slow. Think Syria.
    1
  960. It depends on what you mean by "dominated". If you mean a world where China tells other great powers what they can and can't allow on their media platforms, that's never going to happen. That's not how China operates, and it's unlikely that it ever will.
    1
  961.  @Marty_Wanlass  He would have to believe that he could win. I doubt any of these possible candidates believe that about themselves this deep into the season.
    1
  962. Alexander, You're doing a much better job at getting into the details of this conflict than I am, and I very much appreciate your efforts and I trust what you say. I'd like to see this war end, and I'd like to see it end without a Russian humiliation. But I'm feeling some very strong parallels between this war and the war in Vietnam that the United States took part in. While casualties are important—lives lost on all sides are tragic and not to be taken for granted—the body count is probably not the determinant for victory. At the end of the Vietnam War when we were negotiating our withdrawal one of the American generals told one of the Vietnamese leaders that the Americans had never been beaten in battle, to which the Vietnamese leader explained that this really didn't matter. I'm sure that there are as many differences between the two conflicts as there are similarities, but as a great power engages halfheartedly against a nationalist army that is supported logistically by an opposing great power, I can't help but feel déjà vu, and I wonder if this isn't all intentional. I think that Russia is the stronger force and the more militarily capable. But a large part of what destroyed the Soviet Union was their endless war in Afghanistan, which was similar to the American experience in Vietnam. I think that allowing the war to creep on for a long time playing a defensive encroachment strategy might be tactically optimal, I worry about the long-term consequences.
    1
  963. That sword cuts both directions.
    1
  964. Whatever it takes.
    1
  965. You mean "it won't work for India".
    1
  966.  @ronica2623  China is actually more concerned with getting the children that already exist to not abandon their elders. In some jurisdictions you can be fined if you don't visit your parents once in a while. So yes, the government is concerned about filial relationships going forward, but it's not so much about economics. As automation gets increasingly advanced it's going to be more and more difficult to keep everybody working anyway. Taking care of an aging population isn't going to be answered by increasing the number of children; it will have to be based on altering the resource distribution models.
    1
  967.  @ronica2623  I think that model is approaching its last days, but that doesn't mean the Chinese government agrees with me. I am confident though that the measures they are taking to halt international adoptions has to a lot more to do with curbing the human trafficking obscenities encouraged by the practice and reducing an outdated perception that China is poor, backwards, and misogynistic. I seriously doubt that it has anything to do with maintaining population numbers
    1
  968.  @Faithriders4830  Flu deaths in the United States by year according to CDC: 2010-11—37,000, 2011-12—12,000, 2012-13—43,000, 2013-14—38,000, 2014-15—51,000, 2015-16—23,000, 2016-17—38,000, 2017-18—61,000, 2018-19—34,000, 2019-20—22,000. COVID deaths in 2020 are currently at 263,000 and this is with social distancing and mask use by all responsible individuals and other measures designed to suppress the spread of the disease, measures not used in previous years to suppress the spread of influenza. COVID is on a completely different scale than the flu. The 2018 leading causes of death are as follows according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Heart disease: 655,381 Cancer: 599,274 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 167,127 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 159,486 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 147,810 Alzheimer’s disease: 122,019 Diabetes: 84,946 Influenza and pneumonia: 59,120 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 51,386 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 48,344 If 2020 numbers are similar than COVID would be the number three cause of death after cancer and heart disease and above all safety-related accidents. It would be nearly five times the death rate for influenza and pneumonia.
    1
  969.  @Faithriders4830  The only people that are lying about it are the people who aren't taking it seriously. It's going to be the third largest killer this year and unlike the numbers 1 & 2, it's virulently contagious.
    1
  970. @Zach Devivo Exactly.
    1
  971.  @ohmelts42  Privilege is probably not the best choice of words. There are many white people who legitimately feel non-privileged. It's rather a lack of a specific set of real social, legal and historical obstacles that are broadly faced by people who do not pass as white and are generally not faced by people who do.
    1
  972.  Artoria Pendragon  As I mentioned, I'm not thrilled with the term "privilege". The obstacles you and your family and community faced are totally legitimate for you to claim. That doesn't hand-waive away the obstacles that ethnic and racial minorities face today, or erase the long-term effects of obstacles faced in the past.
    1
  973.  @brianmistake2097  "remember when China invaded Tibet" I wasn't alive during the Tang Dynasty.
    1
  974.  @josephdestaubin7426  I don't think China would be that easily goaded into attacking the United States, at least not to a degree that can't be walked back. China's long-term plans are for the reincorporation of Taiwan and the Chinese leadership knows that a premature engagement with the United States puts that in Jeopardy. There could be an incident where a couple of destroyers collide in the East China Sea or something but I think the United States would have a difficult time convincing the world, let alone its own people, that that kind of thing would warrant a full-on war with China.
    1
  975.  @jacobriverson3807  The middle class in China can't do that now and they are plenty supportive. Why people assume the Chinese have less love for their country than the citizens of other nations I cannot fathom.
    1
  976.  @josephdestaubin7426  I think that terrain and infrastructure constraints preclude a large Chinese initiative against India and China is very calculating regarding Taiwan. While their island building in the South China Sea is certainly provocative I don't see them as hills to die on in China. And at this point, a conflict there would be the result of someone else attacking China. China's leaders are well aware of what led up to the War in the Pacific and they are keen to avoid the Thucydides trap. There could be a miscalculation and perhaps a change in leadership at some point that is less aware of the risks than the current cadre, but if China can't be goaded into a conflict within the next decade it likely won't matter. At that point China will be the world's most powerful state and the Belt & Road diplomacy will have born fruit and most countries will probably be very reluctant to openly side against them militarily or economically.
    1
  977.  @josephdestaubin7426  I'm not sure what your standards of proof are. Perhaps you consider the explosion of the battleship Maine in Havana Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin incident or the link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 as proven victimhood of international aggression. It seemed to be proven enough to bring the American public onboard initially, though most of the rest of the world didn't seem to buy it (No offense to the Koreans in Vietnam or the British in Iraq). Or perhaps you consider these events to be so far back in time that they are no longer relevant to the argument. I'm also perplexed by the term "sadly". You can't seriously want this war to take place, can you?
    1
  978. It's nice to see such a clean brain.
    1
  979. People don't trust anyone that's obviously smarter than themselves.
    1
  980. This is so irritating. Buttigieg was the smartest candidate running, and while he didn't win, he punched massively above his weight class while he was in the fight. Yes, he's not the most progressive candidate and it's perfectly okay to want a candidate that's more progressive (sorry you didn't get one, Biden wasn't my choice either). But for a guy from an Indiana rust-belt town, he is pretty progressive, and he's willing to fight for a progressive when and if a progressive gets the nod, because he's really smart. I don't get the hate, at least not from the left. He's a powerful and willing ally. He knows enough about mid-western sentiment to not embrace the progressive poster child image but he will do what he can to move the country towards a progressive set of goals. Don't fight your friends, especially the ones that aren't making you look bad, unless you want to lose of course. Sometimes it feels like there are people who would rather have indignant righteousness than incremental progress. If that's not you though then there's no reason to be slamming Pete when he's so effectively fighting against Trump.
    1
  981. Those secondary theatres were very real to the people who lived there.
    1
  982.  @khrystynahrynkevych7440  I'm not exactly sure what your point is. If you're saying that life was better for West Germans in the fifties and sixties had a higher standard of living then Russians did in that time, I would agree. Germans currently have and have always had better living standards than Russians throughout modern history. Germany has very different issues than Russia, and it always has. But that doesn't mean Russia hasn't sometimes benefitted from war. They've also suffered from war, even the wars that they won. The one thing Russia hasn't done much of, is shrink from war. Win or lose, they tend to be all in.
    1
  983.  J H  Iran is the strongest country in the region with the possible exception of Turkey.
    1
  984.  J H  Israel has the best equipment and the most reliable ally in the region, but they are not the most powerful. They don't have nearly the reach that Iran has. The only Arab country that would be close to Iran is Egypt. Strength in the region is generally hard to gauge. Real strength is suppressed and the facade of strength is on full display. Iran is one of the few countries in the region capable of producing its own arms. It has a large and largely loyal population. And their loyalty is genuine; it's not based out of fear of some crazy paranoid leader. Israel also has the capacity for arms manufacture and they produce high quality weapons, but they don't have the population to draw on that Iran does. Saudi Arabia and the other gulf states are empty shells dependent on foreign equipment with very undisciplined soldiers and no likelihood of change on that front. Pakistan has strength but you're kind of getting out of the region there. Turkey is also on the periphery but they do play a significant role in West Asia, and in many ways they are the mirror of Iran.
    1
  985. Perhaps I shouldn't mention the Union Jack hanging on the wall of Tom Grundy's location there. I'm sure it's a coincidence but it was a little comical.
    1
  986. I have the same feelings. But Bill had a lot of good points the other night. Most Americans, including Mr. Bremmer here, are far too dismissive of China. This idea that China's quality level is substandard and will remain so going forward is categorically wrong. His assertion that Chinese scientists and engineers want to get out of China and work in the United States is true for some, but it's hardly universal. And while American universities have generations of prestige fluffing up their reputation, Xinhua and Beijing are every bit as elite as anything in the United States. The reason Chinese will spend money to get their kids into American universities is because if you have money, it's easier to get your kid into Yale than it is to get them into Xinhua. I hope he's right about renewed investment in American infrastructure. America needs to invest in all kinds of stuff. And while I agree that the new administration is going to move us in that direction, I worry, like Bill Maher, that the political pendulum will swing back before long redirecting collective investment back into tax relief the next time the Republicans regain control. One last point. China is not a poor country. It's not so much about how much money you've got; it's about what you can do with it. China has been very creative at leveraging its resources and it continues to look for ways around the chokehold the United States has on global financing. At the micro level, the Chinese people may only have $10,000 incomes on average, but they can live comfortably on their income with most of the stuff Americans have gone deep into debt to acquire.
    1
  987.  @shakekr1750  The Packers defeated the Chiefs in the first Super Bowl.
    1
  988. I've always been annoyed with our proclivity to encourage separatist movements around the globe. We fought tooth and nail against our own separatist movement in the 1860's and we wouldn't be nearly as strong or successful as a country had we allowed it to go uncontested or lost that conflict. I think that we support the right of self-determination primarily because it keeps countries small, weak, and poor. However, it sounds so good to the ear that most American's have been trained to defend it on moral grounds. I know from experience that it's very difficult to succeed arguing against it even though it destroys the lives of so many. It's also frightening considering the number of potential groups in America that could theoretically plant a flag and declare their desire to be free. Fortunately, we don't yet have foreign countries working to create and support any such movements, or at least I'm not aware of any.
    1
  989.  @graveperil2169  Hong Kong is unlikely to have provincial status once the One Country/Two Systems era is over. It may not even be a separate city from Shenzhen.
    1
  990.  @endintiers  Running out of assets first makes whatever you've got obsolete.
    1
  991. Taiwan is not another country, Jeesh.
    1
  992.  @catrojana3694  Too much conspiracy theory for me here. I don't think you need to go into conspiracies to understand what's happening. Most Americans believe that the liberal democratic system is the only legitimate system and all others are doomed to failure. China's success threatens this worldview, so certain power brokers in the United States are trying to undermine China's well-being and that which is not out in the open is just barely under the surface.
    1
  993. Venus is looking better all the time.
    1
  994.  @truthful3777  It's also the most effective chokepoint for Chinese shipping.
    1
  995.  @truthful3777  I don't think Malaysia and Indonesia would be doing the blockading. I think it would be the United States, and probably a lot of it would be submarine enforced.
    1
  996.  @truthful3777  I'm not advocating for this. I just think it is what would happen. Indonesia and Malaysia will be under great pressure from both sides to either accommodate or confound Chinese shipping and that may include pushing for permission to patrol in those countries' territorial waters. Whether or not Indonesia's and Malaysia's and Singapore's territorial waters will be respected will depend on the ferocity of the war between China and the United States and on those SE Asian countries' overall capacity (military, economic, diplomatic) to push back hard against the USN and or the PLAN, and their willingness to go to war themselves. The cost of warships is high. Shore batteries provide more bang for the buck, but they are far less mobile and it's impossible to project power with them. These countries will have some difficult but profound decisions to make should this conflict occur.
    1
  997. That's the best analysis I've heard from Ian Bremmer since this thing started.
    1
  998. I enjoy this show but these guys need to run for office if they think it's so easy.
    1
  999.  @vm8785  It looks like you're the one trying to shut down an opinion you disagree with.
    1
  1000.  @vm8785  Actually I owe you an apology. I misread your post. I read "stop to let her speak" as "Stop letting her speak". Again, my apologies.
    1
  1001.  @vm8785  Grammatically "stop to let her speak" means stop interrupting and give the person their time to say what they wish to say, which would be allowing her to express her opinion. "Stop letting her speak" means don't allow her into the conversation., which would be shutting down her opinion.I don't really want to shut down your opinion, though I think I disagree with it. But if you are suggesting that this person, or any other, should not be allowed to express their opinion, than you are attempting to shut down their speech. Frankly, I'm not much of a free speech advocate and I'm not really bothered by accusations of shutting down speech. I just thought it was ironic that you advocated for your opinion to be respected when that expressed opinion appeared to be that someone you disagreed with should not be heard.
    1
  1002.  @tombrunila2695  Not during a war it doesn't.
    1
  1003. Lum and Sailor Moon — swweeeet!
    1
  1004. This required an investigation? It was pretty obvious at the time.
    1
  1005. The crux of the problem is that China won't allow independent investigations in Xinjiang. The most likely reason they won't allow it, aside from the fact that no one else is being asked to refute these kinds of allegations, is because they know that even if an independent investigation finds nothing, that it will be chalked up to the government effectively hiding the truth. And of course if they did find an incidence of something or other, it would be held up as proof of systemic human rights abuses throughout the region. So even if there is no abuse, China can't prove it to the satisfaction of their critics. The only thing they can hope to do is to provide a good enough product to overcome the political slander.
    1
  1006.  @bosunbill9059  I'm not sure everyone is bribed, but everyone is biased, including me. I think the western media culture is so anti-Chinese that the truth doesn't matter to them at all. I think this stems from two things, the first of which is the disappointment in the results of the Tianenmen incident in 1989 which did not result in the replacement of the Chinese governemnt with a liberal democracy as hoped for and did result in violence between PLA soldiers and students with the kind of lopsided damage that one might expect in a fight between soldiers and students. The second force driving the anti-Chinese bias is the fact that China strikes back against journalists in-country that are too critical. If a journalist does a hit piece on country or the government or the culture, they won't be able to get their visa's renewed. Western journalists view themselves as heroes of the people, and they don't like having to follow rules of countries who don't place press freedom above national stability.
    1
  1007. You reap what you sow.
    1
  1008.  @jianyuhua  That's not what he's saying at all. He's explaining that "freedom of speech" pertains only to government actions, which is the case in the United States where the NYT operates. He explains that the New York Times is not an arm of the government and therefore does not have to protect free speech on its platforms. This is the case according to U.S. law. China, for better or worse, does not protect free speech. Some alleged Chinese actions, notably the fairly recent disappearances of Hong Kong booksellers that most observers believe to be abductions by the state for the sale of banned books, point to PRC government suppression of free speech within Hong Kong. I suspect that this incident is probably fueling the opposition to the extradition bill that started this whole thing. All that being said, the New York Times as well as many other western media outlets have a strong anti-Chinese bias in their reporting, and if Crystal Ball is correct then the NYT is extending that bias to their comment platforms in a way reminiscent to what the Chinese government does on the platforms that it controls.
    1
  1009.  @taocry  Actually I do. You may misunderstand my point though. I'm not suggesting that Chinese are constituted of immigrants to the region or that they have liquidated the original inhabitants, both of which accurately describe America. What I'm suggesting is that all the people of China, whether Han, Zhuang, Hui, Man, Uyger, Miao, Yi, Tujia, Zang, Mongol, Dong, Bouyei, Yao, Bai, Chosin, Hani, Li, Kazak, Dai She, Lisu, etc., etc., etc., or immigrant foreigner, they all belong to China and they are all Chinese. That's the same attitude we have in America, at least those of us who are not racist nationalists.
    1
  1010.  @taocry  China definitely practices a form of affirmative action to benefit its minorities and I know there is some disgruntlement felt by those who don't directly benefit from those policies. It's not so much about justice as it is about making sure that Chinese ethnic minorities feel like they have a place and a future in China so that they don't develop strong ethnocentric nationalist sentiments which could hypothetically threaten the integrity of the country. It's a delicate balancing act by the central government but there are enough examples around the world today of destabilizing tribalism to warrant the policies. If you have missed out on opportunities because of this policy then I sympathize with you personally. But you should take some pride in the fact that your sacrifice will help strengthen your country and keep it together. I'm sorry if that's cold comfort.
    1
  1011.  @taocry  I don't for a moment doubt the existence of the Han ethnicity. I do argue that Han ethnicity is composed of the descendants of many smaller ethnic groups that were once separate and in some cases competing nationalities. The one group I'm familiar with are the Shu of Sichuan but I know there are several others. The argument you made in another post that this is true of most if not all modern nationalities, I would agree with. Modern Germans are the descendants of Goths, Franks, Teutons and Saxons. Modern French are descendants of Franks, Gauls, Burgundians and Normans among others. The descendants of these groups in China have considered themselves one ethnicity for hundreds and in many cases thousands of years and over time most of China's current minorities will probably merge in as well. There's nothing wrong with this; in fact it brings stability to the lives of hundreds of millions of people. If I've inadvertently insulted you then I apologize.
    1
  1012.  @lycos888  Neither does Guangdong wish to be independent. Though many in Texas do.
    1
  1013.  @lycos888  They also don't because the vast majority of them love their country and understand that they are far better off as part of a powerful and prosperous China then they are on on the border of it. Free speech and democracy can be nice, but stability, comfort and prosperity are actually more appreciated whether people admit it or not.
    1
  1014. Not yet, but you may get your turn eventually.
    1
  1015. He put her on the Court. That's something you do when somebody dies—you talk to the people that were important in their lives.
    1
  1016. America would not benefit from PLA military assault on Taiwan. The U.S. might set China back twenty years by destroying her navy (if things indeed went that way) but it would be at huge cost, militarily and economically. Also, there is no guarantee of victory, although I do think that right now the American military is the stronger of the two. And even if the United States drove back the Chinese military, it would just be kicking the can down the road, and the second time round the world would be seeing a ferocity of rage unlike anything the world has seen in since the Germans marched their butthurt armies across Europe in response to Versailles.
    1
  1017.  @DefenestrateYourself  This goes a little beyond a strong safety net and groups that have automatically received money regardless of income here in the United States haven't necessarily fared so well. But I do have an open mind and I'm very cognizant of the possibility that labor may not be available for everyone in the future and the repercussions of such an environment. I really hope this proves successful and gives us a good model going forward.
    1
  1018. They're engineers.
    1
  1019.  @chonghauhan  I have massive respect for engineers. I'm just teasing 'em for being nerds. Of course they're highly successful as a career group and consequently highly desirable as mates. But I'm not going to tell them that. Their heads are big enough as it is.
    1
  1020. It always has been.
    1
  1021. So once the decision to abort is rejected, how are the needs of the child, the person both most affected and least able to decide, supposed to be considered?
    1
  1022. Akray Bothorda, to your reply of my post, the difference where "the needs of the child can be overridden by the mother in the first few months of pregnancy" is that no child is born and unless you take a pro-life stance where the rights of a fetus are taken into account the needs of the child never materialize and therefore need not be taken into account. Once a child is born all parents need to be obligated to care for, support and love that child. The fact that the child, once born, now exists matters and one's selfish desire to disassociate from that real person should not override the needs of that child. The only two ways to give a man the same options as a woman are either to permit coercive abortions or to ban abortions entirely. Both of these options are worse for our society than living with the inherent inequality of decision-making ability.
    1
  1023. Everybody who doesn't want a pregnancy to occur needs to have there own contraception. I always told my daughters, "Don't trust the guy to be prepared, he ain't thinking, be prepared yourself." If I'd had sons I'd have given the same advice in reverse, "Don't trust the girl to be prepared, she's calculatin', be prepared yourself."
    1
  1024. Because the decision for the father to opt out of support doesn't stop the child from coming into existence the way an abortion does regardless of whether or not that decision takes place in the first few months of pregnancy. If the child is born then neither parent should be able to opt out of support. If the child is given up for adoption then the birth parents should have to pay child support to the family that's raising their kid. If the child is not born, then there is nothing to pay, but if somehow there was my argument would be the same, both should pay.
    1
  1025. The question is "What is evil?" I'm not sure our definitions will match.
    1
  1026. You're misreading him. He's looking for cheap votes come this election. He's a lot more terrified of losing his job than he is of pissing off China.
    1
  1027.  @SSChevy2004  Also, Puerto Rico, USVI, American Samoa, Northern Marianas and Guam
    1
  1028. Samol Duang, you're right. It would be happening if the order is carried out, and there's a high likelihood that once ordered it would be carried out. However, unless we're sure that Trump is going to do something like that, the damage done to our system of government through this action has to be weighed against the probability of such an order being made and executed. And remember, there already has been a lot of damage recently to our system of government. Removing the president might spark a civil war. Slactweak, I understand your logic and I respect it but a mutiny is a mutiny and this action, constitutionally enshrined or not, would be extremely destabilizing. If Trump managed to rally his deplorables, you might have brownshirts in the streets.
    1
  1029.  @Squee.1366  Agreed and liked.
    1
  1030.  @diegotapia2830  Russian resources are not unlimited either, and Russia has a more difficult argument to maintain support among her people. While fighting for global respect is a fairly worthy cause, fighting for survival is an absolutely worthy one.
    1
  1031.  @tshavfengvang7831  Enemies of the state that might actually field troops (1) USA (2) UK (3) Japan (4) India (5) Australia. I still think Japan is an extreme long shot. India, attacking in the extremely difficult to supply Himalayas, and Australia, with no significant military strength, together wouldn't provide enough force to effect the outcome of a war. A combination of weakness and distance would have the British playing a minor role, but they might still get a speaking part. That leaves the real defense of the island in the hands of the Americans and the residents of Taiwan itself. By the way, I've indulged your description, but not one of those countries you listed are enemies of China at this date. Right now China has no enemies at the state level, though it has several at the state wannabe level.
    1
  1032.  @johnng7107  He didn't say they deserve it, he said that if this were happening in the West that that would be the result. I think, by and large, he is mistaken in that assessment. As for their identity, the people of Hong Kong face a serious identity crisis. Their current political situation is on a clock and we're getting to the point where much of the population is now going to live to see that clock chime. Behind this sense of impending uncertainty, both the economic prosperity and political-economic importance of Hong Kong is declining relative to its Chinese counterpart cities, one of which is likely to swallow it shortly after the border is dismantled. I'm sure that this is stressful to Hong Kong residents and a certain amount of resistance to these impending realities is understandable, especially when any cooperation between the Hong Kong government and the central government is in-your-face evidence of a future that's political and economic liberalism, what many would say is the spirit of Hong Kong, is almost certain to be eliminated.
    1
  1033.  @AnnaKaunitz  No spoken language is older than the fifth century. Language family? That's a different story.
    1
  1034.  @AnnaKaunitz  A tribe is a group of related clans. A nation is a group of related tribes. If they're not a tribe then they are a nation.
    1
  1035.  @jakegold5495  I definitely agree.
    1
  1036.  @ebonymaw8457  You have way to much confidence in our allies, but then again, the pretense was pretty absurd.
    1
  1037.  @ebonymaw8457  The United States is stronger than either China or Russia, but our allies are not. In a genuine war setting Russia would have more war fighting capacity than any single country except for the United States and China. Europe might have a comparable war fighting capacity, but they'd have to come together in a way that they aren't now. It's not just about the economy. In a full on war money can be disregarded and Russia has one of the best situations for doing just that. What matters in the long run are human capital, industrial capacity and raw materials. Iran is weak when compared to the other world powers (USA, China, Russia, Europe), but they are not weaker than their neighbors. None of these countries (or Europe) are going to lose in their own backyard, much less in their own territory, the terrain advantage is too strong, unless two or more world powers gang up on them alone. Non world powers would play an appreciated but insignificant role.
    1
  1038.  @ebonymaw8457  "There's just no way NATO's coming down from the outside my guy. Not in any conventional war anyway..." 100% agree with that statement. NATO is composed of two global powers and Britain, Canada, and Turkey. Russia is one global power and nobody. If Russia tries to invade NATO, they will lose. The question is, could NATO invade Russia. I think the answer is yes, if they act in concert, because two global powers is greater than one global power. But if we're just talking about Europe, or just the United States, then I think the answer is no. Iran is definitely stronger than Saudi Arabia. Turkey is a harder call. Turkey is definitely stronger as part of NATO, but I think by itself that it's probably pretty close. Turkey has some better hardware, but Iran is less dependent on allies and it has more people. I don't think either could take the other in a fair fight. You are comparing "The West" to these individual countries and I think that that logic maybe losing its pertinence. NATO did not rally behind the United States in either Vietnam or Iraq. If the United States attacks somebody else, they will probably be on their own. The same is even more true of Turkey. Neither China, Russia, nor Iran are going to attack a NATO member unless they are attacked first, and all of them have particularly complex relations with Germany which complicates Europe's role in anything. I just don't see "The West" fighting a war in the future anymore.
    1
  1039. Sounds very Fukayamish. My understanding is that Xi Jingping is extremely popular among Chinese. Overthrowing Xi would be a very risky procedure.
    1
  1040. I suspect the Chinese are going to skip this phase. If I'm guessing correctly, the Chinese will go directly to fully autonomous drones without the pilot.
    1
  1041.  @The136th  My suggestion is that the Chinese won't have the live pilot in the formation.
    1
  1042.    I think that if NATO moved to make Ukraine a member, Russia would take Ukraine rather than let that happen. Russia feels very betrayed over the admission of the Baltic countries into NATO. Putin will not let that happen again on his watch.
    1
  1043. The girl's injured eye is admittedly tragic and I hope she's recovering and I hope that permanent damage can eventually be healed (last I heard she lost the eye). Nonetheless, from my vantage point in the United States it looks like the struggle between the police and the protesters has been remarkably light on casualties considering both the numbers involved and the duration of protests. I think the protests are beginning to lose the overall support of the world's people. There's less coverage now than there has been and I think more people are seeing tear gas and dyed water compared to thrown bricks and home-made incendiaries and thinking that the protesters represent the more violent group. I think more people are sympathizing with the police force than before as they think of the tedium annoyance faced by the police. The fact that the police are Hong Kong police rather than PRC police or soldiers makes a lot of people view them as less villainous. Also, comparing the anti-China protesters to the pro-China protesters, one sees a distinct age difference. The anti-China protesters are masked and dressed in black like paramilitaries while the pro-China crowd looks like it's made up of middle-class office workers. Optics are definitely swinging away from the youth movement.
    1
  1044.  @matthiuskoenig3378  There was no immigration policy because it wasn't necessary. It's still not necessary, and it never has been.
    1
  1045.  @Jamicaman516  Which is why producing simpler weapons that can be churned out quickly might be a better industrial strategy. I think simple missile platforms would be one key to ultimate victory.
    1
  1046.  @Jamicaman516  You're right in that it doesn't work if the mass-produced cheap weaponry is liquidated by more advanced weapon system that can't be touched, which was the case in Iraq. It gets more complicated when the technological gap between existing hardware isn't as wide to begin with. If your best stuff is taking casualties then replacement of that stuff becomes a concern, and if you can't field replacement equipment in real time because of its complexity than you may lose through attrition. Any assumption that an invasion of China will be swift and decisive in my opinion is a mistake. Chinese arms and personnel are effective in a way that America's recent enemies have not been. The Chinese government—both its industry and its military—is efficient and trusted by the Chinese people. Chinese terrain is much more varied than anything in Iraq. And Chinese assets are well-protected by the largest defensive missile arsenal in the world. An American invasion into China would likely take casualty numbers and equipment losses that the U.S. hasn't experienced since WWII. After the initial clash the contest would begin on who could best replace losses. That is both a quantitative and a qualitative equation. It's a balancing act. They say you shouldn't take a knife to a gun fight, and that's good advice. But if you're still fighting after all the bullets have been spent, it's good to have that knife.
    1
  1047.  @RomanianReaver  My sources are admittedly sparse, but it looks like tanks aren't doing particularly well in this conflict. It's looking to me like drones are dominating them. But then again, I'm just regurgitating what I'm seeing from my laptop monitor on the other side of the world.
    1
  1048.  @ajisenramen888 Seeking advice from Mussolini, I see?
    1
  1049. Lighter-than-air ducted-fan solar-skin dirigibles. Slow, but cheap.
    1
  1050.  Rise up  A non traitor to whom?
    1
  1051. All hail Timurlane!!
    1
  1052. Really? That would be very surprising to me.
    1
  1053. Why should Germany even condemn this law? What other country has a major city within its borders that is allowed to operate with an entirely different political ideology, a different currency, and exempt from many of the country's laws? Now that I think about it, I guess the last example was West Berlin in Germany. Oh yeah, and then there's Guantanamo Bay which isn't much of a city. Both of these cases are really different though. China's been very light-handed in Hong Kong over the last two decades honoring an agreement that it made when it was in a much weaker position. They probably would be better off just jettisoning the agreement and weathering the international condemnation for a decade or two, but they are trying to act in good faith and so they continue to carry on with this open wound that they aren't allowing themselves to properly treat.
    1
  1054. I hope these comments don't deep-six the guy's career or the success of his band.
    1
  1055. That's assuming that China and Russia would be the ones who picked the fight. But I agree with the assessment that the United States and Japan would win at least during the current decade.
    1
  1056.  @jamiemeza6148  I think their act is together. The only possible serious threat comes from the United States and I don't think the United States is interested in a war with China. If the U.S. and China went to war and the United States really believed that they faced an existential threat from China then the U.S. would win if it happened today. But Americans, despite a lot of ill will towards China, do not see them as an existential threat, and they will not engage in total war, which is what would be necessary to stop progress in China. As for time and money, I don't think that's a formidable problem for China. I think time is definitely on China's side, and I think that while participating in the established, western dominated, global economic regime is the best way for China to strengthen and progress quickly, I don't really think it's necessary. China has shown remarkable resilience during global economic crises in 1997 and 2008 and I think their heavily command-influenced market economy is one of the most nimble in the world. I don't want to oversell China's future prospects; their are many challenges on their horizon. But I have a great deal of confidence in the country's ability to deal with challenges, which I think rivals the same abilities demonstrated by the United States.
    1
  1057.  @jamiemeza6148  Since the seventies I’ve been paying keen attention. The United States was very supportive of China so long as the Cold War was on and Americans assumed that China was naturally evolving into a western-style liberal democracy. This illusion was shattered by the tragic events in Tiananmen Square in 1989. Since then political relations have been cool (in the bad sense of the term). Chinese government and industry have definitely been involved in industrial espionage and the free-rider argument is a legitimate one, but American businesses and consumers could not overcome the lure of trade with China and all that China had to offer them. China has since sought out and taken advantage of every competitive advantage, whether it be above board or not, it could find and they have defended their ability to do so. On a political level, this includes treatment of their weaker neighbors. I have no illusions that China is a nation of angels. I think China is strong, proud, industrious, well-governed, and neither better nor worse than the United States which is it’s only real peer competitor. I do think China’s behavior is logical and steeped in realpolitik, and I think their future century is brighter than their past one by a long-shot. American treatment of China has been schizophrenic because we’ve never been so integrally economically linked with a country that we’ve adopted as an ideological enemy. This is made even more nebulous because China refuses to declare the U.S. as an ideological foe. Both sides work with each other while also undermining each other. Both sides are quick to claim victim status, and not without some justification. The relationship between these two countries—and the people, businesses, and institutions within them—is about as complicated as international relations get.
    1
  1058.  BLAIR M Schirmer  Have yet to see a credible reason to realize it.
    1
  1059. I think Beijing is annoyed by it.
    1
  1060. That's the maximum sentence.
    1
  1061. Because when people abuse the right allowing such means other people die.
    1
  1062. Those doing the killing are among the 100 plus million arms barers, many of them legal gun owners. I am not claiming ownership of a firearm is an abuse of the right; I am claiming that shooting a person or people except in the case where doing so saves the life of someone whose life is in certain and imminent jeopardy (outside of the context of war) is an abuse of the right.
    1
  1063. Both would dominate because they would be the largest and most influential members by a long shot. If you have an organization with one superpower in it, that superpower will dominate all of the decision making (see NATO). It wouldn't be because Russia has evil intentions necessarily, but because Russia would feel compelled to promote the interests of their people over that of others, and they'd have the heft to do so. Right now in the European Union, Germany has an outsized influence because they are the biggest dog in the yard. This sometimes chafes the other members who feel like their interests are neglected when they don't align with the Germans, and they're correct. If Russia were brought in, it would be at the extreme expense of Germany and France. Your read on China is simplistic and stupid. China is one of the least aggressive and least restrictive global influencers the world has seen in the last half-century. Certainly they are for their size and strength. In fact, it's fair to criticize them for not being active enough internationally, and many do criticize them for this very reluctance. They are opportunistic and if you don't negotiate skillfully with them they will take advantage of it, but they have no intention of enslaving anyone, or even forcing ideological requirements. They do intend to dominate their region, like the United States does in the Western hemisphere and like Russia is currently trying to do in the current conflict, but that is only natural for a great power. It's not overly invasive. If you're a small weak country, it's absolutely imperative that you accommodate your stronger neighbors for the betterment of your people. Sometimes you can play two strong neighbors off of each other, but you need to be aware of their red lines, and you need to make sure you don't cross them.
    1
  1064.  @mahmoodmai1754  I have a rather strong history background. I've said nothing historically inaccurate. I haven't mentioned everything because that would take too much time. I can see why you might think I'm propagandizing for China. I'm actually just pushing back against an unfair narrative against them. I think China regularly takes stupid actions which hurt their overall image and I have no intention of defending that. However, their treatment of other countries is much less intrusive than that of the United States or Europe. One could argue that it should be a little more critical of behavior when it deals with Myanmar or Laos.
    1
  1065.  @cburgess2805  It looks like about seven hundred if you combine the Han, Tang, and Ming periods, but your point is well taken. Yes, China periodically occupied Vietnam.
    1
  1066. I thought he said his source was a Uighur activist.
    1
  1067. You do know that China can veto any UN action, right?
    1
  1068.  @Theoryofcatsndogs  You got me. I don't see the parallels.
    1
  1069.  @Theoryofcatsndogs  So you're comparing China to Nazi Germany?
    1
  1070.  @ouyangtimothy9164  China does have a history of forced labor, but the laborers were not technically slaves.
    1
  1071.  @obiechan8994  Democracy is not the only way to ascertain the will of the people.
    1
  1072.  @BigBoss-sm9xj  My references are to those conscripted laborers who built the Great Wall and the Grand Canal. Sweatshop labor is paid labor, in that respect it's not slavery. It can be and often is a labor trap, like a factory town. I know China has a few extensive factory villages. I'm not sure how trapped the laborers feel in these locations. A lot of the workers in earlier Chinese factories were upgrading from their rural village lives, but they were still under a lot of pressure and their lives were tightly controlled. Some unfortunately couldn't handle the pressure.
    1
  1073.  @Enderrock424  Ask the question again in 2050 and we can argue about whether or not China actually has a communist government at that time too.
    1
  1074. I couldn't agree with you more about the misuse of trials of captured soldiers on both sides of this conflict.
    1
  1075.  @ayi3455  My interpretation of China's island building campaign is that they want to have reach deep into the South China Sea to control the trade routes and to be able to guarantee safe passage through the Straits of Malacca. I think they are trying to be cagey about their purposes, but I think resource acquisition is secondary.
    1
  1076.  @ayi3455  Ulan Bator is the capital city of Mongolia. Mongolia is a recognized sovereign state. On this I think we can agree. In the end it's probably not going to matter though. China will do what it feels is in their best interest weighing their political, economic and military strengths and weaknesses accordingly.
    1
  1077.  @ayi3455  I'm afraid I don't understand. What's the Quad team?
    1
  1078.  @kaybee65  Thanks for the info. I don't see Biden breaking that up. Neither party in the U.S. is comfortable with Chinese power, in no small part to Chinese actions and assertions mentioned earlier in the thread.
    1
  1079.  @kaybee65  Yeah, I think you're right.
    1
  1080.  @TheKkpop1  The utility of aircraft carriers in the next war is a big point of debate. They certainly are useful between wars, but their degree of vulnerability is something that will definitely be tested the next time that two great powers clash. I do think the United States has a state-of-the-art navy and there are always incidences of mechanical failure when you have such a large assemblage of equipment. China's navy is becoming quite impressive and most of their heavy tonnage ships are pretty new. There is a benefit to having new stuff, you see this in naval engagement throughout history where newer equipment often blows older equipment out of the water. But new stuff has bugs to be worked out too. I don't think there is overall much difference between the technology levels of the American and Chinese militaries. I think both have fields where they have an advantage over the other. Which of those advantages prove to be the difference to the next conflict is not yet known.
    1
  1081.  @chewycaca  America has decades of warfare experience against foes who are substantially less powerful than themselves. That's not to dismiss the service of U.S. war veterans, but as a military machine, going up against China in and around Taiwan is going to be nothing like going up against Iraq or Afghanistan. I do think that the United States has a training advantage on China, in part because of that combat experience that you're pointing to, but I think that advantage is likely to dissipate within the first six months of a conflict. At that point Chinese troops and officers will be every bit as experienced as their American counterparts.
    1
  1082.  Vladimir Putin  Only if they lose… maybe. That's why Taiwan hasn't been reincorporated yet, because victory is not yet certain.
    1
  1083. That's quite a leap there from 'all of China' to 'the whole world'.
    1
  1084. "One Country, Two Systems" was an abomination created in order to avoid violence in 1997. At the time China thought it could gradually absorb the city in a relatively peaceful manner over the course of half-century. Whether because China moved too fast, or perhaps they chose to reintegrate the wrong aspects, or maybe the recalcitrants within Hong Kong just refuse to accept any part of that eventual reality, that vision of peaceful transition is fading quickly.
    1
  1085. "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." What this says is that the United States must not restrict the right of the people to possess and carry "arms". It says that the reasoning behind this is that a free secure state must have a well regulated militia. It does not say that the statement is dependent on the reasoning. It's actually really poor English and was probably designed to be nebulous in order to get enough people to see what they wanted in it to get it passed. The only term here that is really debatable here is "the people". Does that mean independent individuals have a right to bare arms that cannot be infringed, or does it mean that the community of people as a unit have a right to bare arms as that community sees fit? We aren't really following either line of logic currently. We consider the right to bare arms an individual right which we infringe upon regularly with a plethora of restrictive laws.
    1
  1086. My middle-class Chinese in-laws in Chengdu would disagree with you about whether the United States is a better place to live.
    1
  1087. I wouldn't describe it as panic. I don't think he did anything wrong. His cautionary suggestion to some of his colleagues though, when it got out, might have caused a flight panic if allowed to go unchecked through social media. That's why the local officials were trying to downplay it. Of course what they were saying wasn't true, so it was a cover-up. It was a well-meaning cover, up at least in part though. And it may have been the right thing to do. Of course it looks terrible looking back at it.
    1
  1088.  @dougquan8025  Nor should they be permitted to re-elect someone whose done as much damage to the country and the world as Trump has. Woulda, shoulda, coulda, what're ya gonna do?
    1
  1089.  @copa8  But I'm an average American.
    1
  1090. I thought that was Lenin.
    1
  1091. Unfortunately it's not just gaffes. Trump is a raging nightmare, but Biden is making policy decisions that are out of touch with the times, especially regarding foreign policy. He's still a hell of a lot better than Trump.
    1
  1092. As an American, me too.
    1
  1093.  @samuellinchen5793  China's success has many fathers. Socialism is one, capitalism is another, history is a third. China has been well managed and it has taken advantage of its resources in recent decades. That's likely to continue for some time.
    1
  1094.  @Baz.007  Russia doesn't really need Chinese arms. They have a highly functional arms manufacturing industry that can match the NATO contributions at least to the extant that Ukraine can man them. If NATO brings troops in, that would be a different story.
    1
  1095.  @joetheperformer  I don't think anyone is suggesting that the U.S. is less competent that the Chinese. What's questionable is how much American experience against minuscule naval adversaries constitutes a significant advantage. The U.S. is more experienced, but we haven't faced a naval peer since World War II, so the experience is not as valuable as it would be had the current generation of sailors been fighting another naval peer power. Until now there hasn't been another naval peer power. The Chinese haven't fought anyone—advantage USN. US naval assets are designed to operate and dominate globally, whereas Chinese assets are purpose-built to drive the USN out of the Western Pacific. Time probably favors China on this, but that depends on a lot of variables, and it may prove not to be the case. China's biggest advantage will probably be proximity, which will allow them to harness continental assets for naval engagements to a degree that the United States will not be able to. China also has a substantial manufacturing edge should the conflict last long enough for replacement to matter. The United States has an advantage in the fact that while China's maritime trade could be blocked if the USN is not knocked out of the game, the U.S. would be virtually impossible to blockade no matter how big the PLAN gets. China wouldn't be choked off completely—a lot of key resources could be brought in overland from Russia and Central Asia—but it would definitely slow things down. As for alliances, on the surface it looks like the U.S. has an advantage, and that may well be the case. Right now Japan and Australia seem like pretty solid U.S. allies. South Korea probably would try to stay out of this. Their involvement runs a serious risk of invasion, and their government swings back and forth regarding relations between themselves and China from election to election. If China can maintain their relationship with Russia, then that would pretty much compensate for the U.S.' Pacific alliances, assuming the same degree of participation. Russia has a strong incentive to make sure the United States doesn't win. Though, from a stab-in-the-back diplomacy perspective, they actually benefit the most by encouraging the conflict to go on as long as possible, draining resources from both superpowers and raising their respective position in the world power hierarchy. Whether or not their friendship with China turns out to be genuine won't be known until the relationship is tested.
    1
  1096.  @TheBucketSkill  You are definitely at risk of underestimating your opponent.
    1
  1097.  @Meinan4370  China is keenly aware of Japan's mistakes. I wouldn't count on them to make the same ones.
    1
  1098.  @iandavidvillaloboswong5180  Chinese training has not been as rigorous as American training, partly because U.S. personnel are more familiar with their equipment because of the rapid advances in, and relative newness of, the Chinese fleet assets. This is less the case now than it was a decade ago and it will be less the case in ten years than it is now.
    1
  1099. @michael douglas And if the security forces steamroll you, you can rest assured that the United States and the world will complain vociferously.
    1
  1100.  Tom Koller  I'd like to see a western country take half the measures China has to stop the spread of a disease. People are scared and its leading them to act in ways that will be looked back on in shame, like the way people treated gays when AIDS first appeared. It's sad, especially when it affects children who are particularly vulnerable to the effects of ostracism.
    1
  1101. Fight China or let the globe succumb to Chinese Communism? Gonna be a false dichotomy.
    1
  1102.  @sydlawson3181  I'm also concerned about the Uighur reeducation camps, though I doubt either of us really know what the full story is regarding them. I don't think they are concentration camps per sé, and I definitely do not think they are death or torture camps, but I do suspect that they are indoctrination camps. I'm uncomfortable with that thought, but I understand that China is dealing with radical separatists that I suspect are supported in-part by some western troublemaker organizations, if not by government agencies themselves, but now I'm dipping into conspiracy theory. I heard a few months ago that they were shutting them down, but I haven't seen any confirmation of this since. I do hope that China ends this chapter soon though, both for their own reputation, as well as for the people made to go through this process.
    1
  1103.  @1Lansing1  America is not broke, despite the efforts of the Republican party over the last forty years. Most Americans are broke because we finance our lifestyle with consumer credit as much as with wage income. I'm guilty of that myself.
    1
  1104.  @rodolforaul4631  Be very careful what you wish for. Real revolutions are bloody affairs and the aftermath is even worse. I know Brazil is going through hard times right now, much of it courtesy of your government, and I sincerely hope you can find a better, more socially responsible future without the hassle of cutting off a bunch of heads.
    1
  1105.  @rodolforaul4631  I understand. There comes a point where there are no other options. But go in with your eyes open. Very few revolutions have not led to brutal carnage both of the vanquished, and those victors not deemed ideologically pure enough, and most end with a political result whose improvement on the previous situation is highly questionable.
    1
  1106. If the exercises are strictly political, then I wonder at their utility. I can't see Taiwan moving towards China because of this. When you threaten a society, it binds together against the threat. What I'd like to see China do is to offer congratulations to the new leader in Taipei, along with an offer to come to Beijing and discuss reunification with some degree of preservation of Taiwan's political system in the province. I know it would be rejected, but I think it would be at least as effective as these military exercises at moving Taiwan in the right direction.
    1
  1107. Except that the turnout suggests more adamant support. If people were voting reluctantly, there would be a larger number of people who didn't vote at all.
    1
  1108.  @silverhawkscape2677  That Pyrrhicc Victory made China a world power. The U.S. didn't take China seriously before that, they took China very seriously after that, even through the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution.
    1
  1109.  @silverhawkscape2677  I'll concede. I think that, upon further reflection, that the term "world player" is more accurate than "world power" during this period. Although I think you're being overly dismissive of China's position during the fifties and sixties, and while American trade played a sizable role in China's return to great power status, it was China that made China a great power again, not the United States.
    1
  1110.  @jkc3738  Japan may very well, as probably would Australia. The rest of East Asia would probably think twice, it would certainly be a risky move, and the rest of the world wouldn't matter.
    1
  1111.  @jkc3738  I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at. Maybe you are suggesting that the United States won't risk war with China because they haven't done so with Russia yet? If so I hope you're right. I really don't want to see a war with China. If I'm misunderstanding you please let me know.
    1
  1112. random, no we didn't want him, we got stuck with him, as did the rest of the world.
    1
  1113.  @Harthorn  I disagree with your assessment of our future. This last election has given me a great deal of relief in this respect.
    1
  1114. Has anybody taken a poll where the status quo is not an option? Or maybe that's too dangerous.
    1
  1115. Remember the Maine!
    1
  1116.  @Asonunique23  They're not likely to face off. They're both primarily offensive forces.
    1
  1117. "should"
    1
  1118. Of course we do. And not all of us are bitching, just our fearless leader and his ilk.
    1
  1119.  @garcjr  Let's see what shakes out of this real estate crisis. It will be an interesting test of the Chinese governments ability to deal with an economic situation that comes from within. My bet is that the Chinese government will do what's necessary to staunch the bleeding and this will all be another one of regime-ending events that turns out to be nothing of the sort.
    1
  1120.  @MrFlatage  Whew, didn't intend to offend you. Just pointing out that accountability has to be appropriate for the circumstances or else it has consequences of its own.
    1
  1121.  @MrFlatage  Well, there are costs associated with training and operation because training requires use of equipment by people. Equipment used, even correctly, is subject to wear. The more complex an operation, the more likely that human error or human or equipment inability to meet the challenges either built into the operation or injected by unseen circumstance leads to the loss or damage of equipment or personnel. This has been evidenced by operations performed uniformly throughout the course of human history, but I suspect that by your standards it falls short of proof. So be it. As for you're being obnoxious, you are providing plenty of evidence in this thread. I will defer to that.
    1
  1122.  @fukkitful  I should have guessed. Thanks for the heads up.
    1
  1123. Acknowledged.
    1
  1124.  @Ewig_Luftenglanz  I completely agree regarding new conscripts, but conscripts currently on the payroll should have some relevant training already. You are right about it likely being very unpopular, but so is losing a war.
    1
  1125. Those ethnic minorities do not hate the Chinese. For starters, they are Chinese, and most of them are proud and happy about that. There are small (and sometimes violent) separatist movements in Xinjiang and Tibet but they are not well representative of the populations in those autonomous regions.
    1
  1126. Actually I'm pleased to see DW properly grilling this fellow.
    1
  1127.  @Grottolova  Total COVID deaths in Shanghai: 595 Total COVID deaths in New York City: 40,633
    1
  1128. It happened in Syria.
    1
  1129. And what moral authority does a country like Great Britain have regarding Hong Kong?
    1
  1130.  @vitocorleone8323  What freedoms would a visa-carrying Chinese have in country-X that a Hong Kong resident in Hong Kong does not?
    1
  1131. It's not likely they would have worse foreign policies than Trump or Biden.
    1
  1132.  @DianeKovacs  Putin certainly has his detractors within Russia. But even his detractors recognize that Putin is the locus of power within Russia. Putin also has his supporters. The west raped Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union. Most Russians realize that, if nothing else, Putin stands up to their abusers. That gives him a lot of leeway for abuse of power in the eyes of most of his countrymen, at least those that remember the nineties.
    1
  1133.  @MrManny075 It won't, unless they declare independence, or refuse to come peacefully before 2049.
    1
  1134.  @InVinoVeratas  China is very much looking at the rest of the world. Of course, they still have domestic issues, some of which are profound.
    1
  1135. I don't think NATO would because Japan is not a NATO member. I don't think most European countries would want to have a war with Russia. They probably would provide a lot of non-military support and military logistical support though. You might see direct military support from countries like Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Great Britain. God knows what would happen on the Korean peninsula.
    1
  1136.  @soniama5246  You have a point regarding some human rights lawyers, but which doctors went to jail for actually reporting the truth?
    1
  1137. The amazing people of Hong Kong will stay in Hong Kong. Those folks have no reason to leave.
    1
  1138.  @FrostySire  They don't have to. Life is full of choices. Those who have a future in Hong Kong will almost certainly stay. Those who lack the resources to leave will stay. What's left are the well-to-do that have burned their bridges. Some of them may become useful members of society, but most will become disillusioned whiners.
    1
  1139.  @marrqi7wini54  While I think that land facilities are fine, I'd like them to be able to take advantage of shipping docks because they are already designed to handle large carrier vehicles. Dirigibles could lower themselves to the water surface near a harbor and maneuver into a dock perhaps with the help of a pilot tug. Hydrogen compression would be crucial for this approach and their underbelly would have to be flat instead of rounded, but it would give them the traffic network that they would need to become successful.
    1
  1140. On first blush the new law seems a little draconian, but I really feel like they brought this on themselves.
    1
  1141. Solomon Stringer, overthrowing their government is not something smart people do under any but the most terrifying of circumstances. Our government has issues, more so recently than in memories' past, but we're nowhere near the threshold where overthrowing the government is a sensible or even a sane idea.
    1
  1142.  @happyhappynuts  I don't know if I'd agree that it's disappointing to not abandon territorial claims on their lands. Perhaps I'm too much of an imperialist at heart. I know this causes trouble when lands or bits of them are claimed by more than one entity. I guess I'm more accepting of that because I feel like that's the nature of things. I'm not a big fan of war and death, which I know sometimes results from these disagreements, but I think a country should pursue control of the extant of its territorial identity. And I think it's important to try to be strong so that you can do just that.
    1
  1143.  @John-us9rm  The difference is mostly a matter of time—time of occupation, time of attempted assimilation, and time between now and when these things occurred. Rights are bestowed, defended, or ignored by those who are strong enough to pursue their interests. Eventually the world gets accustomed to the new normal and quits complaining about it.
    1
  1144.  @Nesher92  As a frequently accused PRC bot, I think there is something that you need to understand. The people of China believe to their marrow that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China. They believe this every bit as much as you believe that "Taiwan is not prc territory." If a government in Taiwan ever declares itself independent, the Chinese government, with the overwhelming support of the Chinese people, will militarily attempt to reclaim control of Taiwan, and they will probably succeed. Even if no government in Taiwan declares independence, if the prospect for peaceful reunification fails to materialize by the centennial of the founding of the People's Republic, I fully expect the same to occur. It does not matter that the majority of Taiwan's residents are against it. It certainly does not matter if you or I are against it.
    1
  1145. Not likely, but very funny.
    1
  1146. Power gets to determine what we think the truth is. Because of this, it's difficult to know what the objective truth is. Power allows for the hiding of truth and for the proliferation and acceptance of falsehood because power struggles shape the narrative. Power can also push forward truth, if its wielders desire it. The less a falsehood (or a truth) fits our perceptions, the more power is required to make it seem to be the truth.
    1
  1147. Pakistan was stabbed in the back by the United States in the nineties as we tried to court India in hopes of making them more successful than China (you know, because they were a democracy). When both countries (India and Pakistan) tested nuclear weapons, sanctions automatically went into effect. The U.S. relieved sanctions on India as quickly as possible, but kept them on Pakistan. Once 911 occurred and we needed to get into Afghanistan our only choices were through Pakistan, Iran, Russia or China, we pushed hard to convince Pakistan that we never really sided with India against them—the whole time anti-Muslim sentiment was running rampant here in America. Pakistan may be willing to work with us here and there, but it's going to be a long time before they trust us again.
    1
  1148. I'm trying to think what Russia needs that the countries boycotting them would otherwise provide. I'm kinda coming up empty. Are there goods that Russia desperately needs from the west? We talk about the collapse of the ruble on international markets, but I'm not sure that matters to Russians unless they have investments outside the country.
    1
  1149.  @pads6367  But what do they need to use it on? What does Russia need from the rest of the world?
    1
  1150. What did they say about Iran?
    1
  1151.  @phurian_6560  Actually the entire population of mainland China wants to see reunification. The people of China believe that they are no longer weak and they feel that their disadvantages vis--vis Taiwan's potential allies are steadily diminishing. At some point the people of China will demand that the government makes a move.
    1
  1152.  @derHallen  You sound like every other naysayer that's been rooting for China's demise over the last three decades. China's always on the verge of collapse. Don't believe me, ask Gordon Chang. A handful of protesters in cities with populations of millions don't a revolution make, even if your completely dismissive of the allegations of paid participation. The Chinese people support their government and they long for the reunification of their country. If you don't want to believe it, that's your perogative. It doesn't change reality.
    1
  1153.  @alfreddozier832  Right
    1
  1154. If she insists on people being "indigenous", I wonder if she's willing to have Britain flooded by 200 million Americans, Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders as those of us not indigenous to the New World rush back to our ancestral home.
    1
  1155.  @guzelataroach4450  Signed, The People's Front of Hattusa
    1
  1156. That would sure solve a lot of problems, but I seriously doubt it would be that simple.
    1
  1157. They're not really destroying it because it was never there in the first place.
    1
  1158.  @richiesd1  The current rules will be either renegotiated or ignored.
    1
  1159.  @metrolights891  They're already making new global institutions, most notably the AIIB.
    1
  1160.  @metrolights891  Agreed.
    1
  1161. China will attack Taiwan if Taiwan declares independence, regardless of who's president. Otherwise, China will wait and try to convince Taiwan to come into the fold without violence. Admittedly, this probably won't happen. The U.S. is investing too much into separatist groups like the DPP, and our investment is affective. China will eventually seize back Taiwan if it looks like the only possibility of reincorporation is through military engagement and if China feels like it would definitely win any resulting war. This is currently not the case. When it becomes the case, of that I'm not sure. China will have to assume Japanese involvement and the possibility of involvement by other neighbors against them, even though it's pretty unlikely.
    1
  1162. Interesting take. I'm not much of a conspiracy guy but I don't like Zuckerberg so it fits my narrative.
    1
  1163. China has quality. What they don't have is experience. That will come in the first six months of a conflict. Will China have six months? It's hard to say.
    1
  1164.  @Flightman453  It's overrated by some. It's one of many factors, and it's something that equalizes pretty quickly between combatants.
    1
  1165.  @Flightman453  China's two operational carriers are fully functional, but they are not in the same class as the U.S. supercarriers. China does have a supercarrier currently in sea trials and it looks like two being built.
    1
  1166.  @Flightman453  I'd argue that Russia hadn't had experience. Their army hadn't seen action since Chechnya. Though the same would be true about the United States Navy who, as you allude, hasn't faced a peer competitor since 1945. The Russians seem to be doing okay—they're grinding out an advance that should have them conquering Ukraine in about 2050 or so. Both sides are equally experienced at this point. I think experience has value, both at the level of individual combatants and of their commanders, but I think that other factors are at least as important: technology, morale, and quantity of soldiers (sailors) and equipment. If you try to win by dominating one factor only, you're probably going to lose.
    1
  1167.  @Flightman453  I think it's important that we don't count the stobar carriers against the catobar carriers because the planes launched from the smaller ships can't carry the fuel or munitions that those launched from the supercarriers can. Because of this I think they will be at too much of a disadvantage in combat, assuming that the ships themselves can survive the obligatory missile barrage.
    1
  1168. I got the right answer, but I got it the hard way. I gotta say that that would take some hellacious insight. Also, it requires odd unit dimensions on one side, but the logic would fail if they have a common factor that would allow for a whole unit redefinition, for example a room 25×50 could be defined as a room 50×100 if the units were half-sized.
    1
  1169. She's fighting to preserve policy norms that came to Hong Kong from the 1997 agreement and will almost certainly evaporate by 2049. It may be in her interest to preserve that status quo for the duration of her lifetime. I'm not so sure that is the case for the young men and women of the city who are more likely to be active when that agreement sunsets. In fairness, a lot can happen in the next thirty years. It may not be such a catastrophic absorption by that time.
    1
  1170.  @tim40gabby25  I'm not sure how to take this comment.
    1
  1171.  David Latham  I apologize. I'm trying really hard to express a hypothesis in a way that a reader could understand. It's surprisingly difficult to describe it in a way that makes sense. I appreciate the fact that you actually read it through.
    1
  1172. He's saying that pushing democracy on other countries is a white supremacist stand, and there's reason for suggesting it. Even non-white democracies like Japan and South Korea were pushed into democratic governments by the United States, the obvious exception being India. Fortunately for the East-Asian democracies, it's worked out pretty well. Democracies that are not predominately white demographically aren't really pushing democracy onto other countries to my knowledge. That seems to be the MO for Europe and the United States. And while I don't think that all democratic evangelists are racist, there are certainly a large number that believe that western culture, including liberal democracy, is superior to anything else. This is clearly an example of western chauvinism, and to someone on the outside that values their own culture, it looks a lot like white supremacy.
    1
  1173.  @hamzasyed  I appreciate the amount of thought you are putting into this conversation. You certainly have some good knowledge and you're pretty smart. I would argue myself that there is a difference between perception and reality among the regular people that live in western democracies. Democracy, defined as decisions made based on a majority agreement, is as old as humanity most likely. It probably was invented in Africa because that's where we all come from. Most westerners firmly believe though that democracy was invented in Greece because that's what we were all told in middle school. And for most westerners, embracing democracy means embracing western civilization and accepting that western civilization is the culmination of political, economic, and until recently, technological progress. What you've described in your second point is the cleavage between western humanitarian idealists and western ideological pragmatists. Both groups are western chauvinists but the second group has a stronger grip on foreign policy within the strongest western countries. And even when one of the former gets into power in the U.S. or the U.K., they usually morph into the latter. That certainly was the case with Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, which is why many of their early supporters view them as sellouts. Western democracies absolutely install and support friendly dictators as long as they are useful. Once their usefulness ends, however, we're very quick to criticize their nondemocratic structure and to undermine their regimes in order to placate our more idealistic domestic populace. My point is that regardless of actual practices, the assumption that liberal democracy is both a superior political and fundamentally western system is ubiquitous in the minds of most westerners. And whether or not the liberal democratic missionaries that insist that other countries move towards adherence to this model are actually white supremacists, they are almost to a man (or woman) western chauvinists. Considering that western civilization is usually viewed as white (though certainly there are non-white influences) both by most people within western civilization and most of those outside of it, it's certainly understandable for non-westerners feeling this pressure to view it as white supremacy. It's also a usefully brutal criticism for those wanting to undermine the whole concept, which I suspect is the reason the panelist dropped the term.
    1
  1174. I think Putin's description of Russian history is highly revisionist. You can ask the Iranians how aggressively imperialistic the Russians used to be. Having said that though, it probably is appropriate for Russia to start looking east and south as well as west for political connection. Europe is not really a continent. Its continental status is based on the limited geographical understanding of the ancient Greeks. The Greeks saw the world as three lands (Europe, Asia & Africa) divided by three seas (the Mediterranean, the Black & the Red Seas). But Europe is really just the westernmost region of Eurasia. There are four major cultural groupings that have some presence in Europe. There is the Mediteranean (Greco-Romantic), the Germanic, the Slavic and the Turkic. The first two, along with what remains of the Celtic civilization, are very intertwined and together they make up the West. Russia has always been considered a fringe society by the West. Over the last two hundred twenty years Russia has had major conflicts with France, Britain,Germany and the United States and though Russia has frquently bben an ally of convenience, they've never really been treated as equals, especially culturally. The Eurasian continent has several civilizations on it. It has the aforementioned Western civilization, the Semitic civilization (a substantial percentage of which is in North Africa), the Turkic civilization, the Persian civilization, the Indic civilization, and the Sinitic civilization. There are also Austronesian and Siberian cultures that have strong interactions with the civilizations on their peripheries, but maintain a certain level of distinction. As for Russia, it has tried to be a part of Western civilization and it has had a notable presence in that arena. However, if the Russians choose a more oriental path going forward, which may very well be the best bet going forward, both economically and culturally, then the declaration of a seperate Russian culture might make a lot of sense.
    1
  1175. That's kind of the point of being a professor.
    1
  1176. It's frightening to live on the doorstep of a superpower. You want to be strong and independent, but you know that if push came to shove, it's all over. It's also hard to embrace a technological industrial future when you're defined by a glorious pastoral legacy and so many of your people are still connected to that life. Mongolia has a challenging path ahead of itself no matter which way it walks.
    1
  1177. Give them two arms to hold too.
    1
  1178.  @Roaming-around-the-world  Not a country music fan I see.
    1
  1179. He was more than a decent senator. He was one of the best. He admitted to some of the accusations against him, and apologized personally to LeAnn Tweeden for the infamous photo of him hovering lecherously over her in her sleep, but stated that other accusations were not described the way he remembered it. He went out of his way not to defame his accusers but asked for a fair hearing in the ethics committee, which he was denied primarily to avoid an appearance of hypocrisy by Democrats as they eviscerated Alabama Republican Ray Moore for his history of sexual misconduct. I don't know if he could get passed the incident in another attempt at a Senate seat. The campaign is grueling, and already Minnesota has two Democratic Senators and there's no way he's going to challenge one of them for their seats. My own fantasy scenario involved Klobuchar getting a cabinet position and Governor Walz appointing Franken to finish her term, but that's not going to happen.
    1
  1180.  @evehawasinare228  The independent "journalists" I've seen are just as agenda-driven as the regulars, though often in the opposite direction. I know I tend to believe those reporting what I want to hear, whether that's from CNN, RT, or TLDR. I tend not to believe, and I even personally shut down the same sources when they tell me what I don't want to hear. It's really hard to get beyond my biases, and even when I do, I have no way of telling whether or not what I'm hearing is accurate. If I go by what sounds logical, I'm right back into my bias bubble. I just try (probably with limited success) to keep an open mind, and muddle through as best as I can.
    1
  1181.  Follower of Christ777  That'll counter the brainwashed minds attacking them.
    1
  1182.  @MrSpecialhacker  They're clearly not comparable, but neither were the United States and North Vietnam. There are a lot of variables, many of them political.
    1
  1183.  @dylanmorris7946  That is true. So, why didn't the U.S. steamroll into North Vietnam? or for that matter, Syria? because of politics. The same might or might not occur in Iran. There are political reasons not to go all out, especially if Iranian resistance proves to be united and effective or if Russia or China starts parking planes in Iranian airbases.
    1
  1184.  @dylanmorris7946  A few planes could change the war if it meant that U.S. military felt it imprudent to attack those airfields with Russian or Chinese assets present because that could mean an escalation of participation. Fighting such a war without international support (likely with international condemnation), no formidable allies, no land access, on the other side of the world,… Could the U.S. do it? yes, if the U.S. wanted to badly enough it could do it. In the real world would the United States have the will to see the project through? I don't know. It's not worth it. There's no good foreseeable outcome.
    1
  1185.  @valorwarrior7628  One thing I noticed in the video is that the Roman empire was centered on the Mediterranean and Black Seas and most of the empire was close to open water which suggests that supplies could be moved quickly throughout the empire. The Chinese empire appeared to be much more land based with most of their famous battles taking place deep in the continental interior. I wonder if this skews our view of logistics being that the Huanghe River is great for agriculture but questionable for navigation.
    1
  1186.  @kek6969-w9y  Europe geographically is part of Asia.
    1
  1187.  @alikhanmoazzam  Whether or not that's a problem is entirely dependent on how you distribute your resources.
    1
  1188.  @maxglide  I don't think they have any kind of guilt complex. It's all about power accumulation and maintenance. Politically useful facts and conspiracy theories are retained while others are ignored or discarded.
    1
  1189. Justin, I'm sure you're correct about you're hard-core progressive geezer friends, but there are also a lot of Republicans who at one time filled the ranks of anti-war marches back in the sixties. Some people don't change but many people do, especially once they start accumulating property and settling into suburbia, start worrying about who their daughters are dating and getting pissed off at the next generation who "never knew the value of a hard day's work". It happens with every generation and it's why the ever-present prophecy of a progressive and tolerant future always fails to materialize.
    1
  1190.  @battledroid224  "…educate the people of China. China wouldn't last." How is that in the interest of the Chinese people? Why would an educated population destroy itself?
    1
  1191.  @haidicheng5142  It'll be a great day for China but probably scary for Hong Kongers. Not necessarily because of potential repression but because that level of change always brings uncertainty in many forms.
    1
  1192.  @darkhorseman8263  I'm not sure that is inevitable. Worker productivity is very high these days. So long as products and services can be produced then it's just a matter of distribution. I think China will figure it out.
    1
  1193.  @nobodyherepal3292  China's sanctioned right now. China would still be able to trade throughout Asia. They might lose trading ability with the United States, Japan and Western Europe, but for how long? Russia's under sanctions for taken back Crimea, it seems survivable.
    1
  1194. The thing about this is that we have institutions tasked with investigating suspicious circumstances. The primary institution is the police. Also the prosecutor's office and the press as well as victim's advocacy organizations of one sort or another have roles in these kinds of things. I certainly am not going to suggest that these institutions are not corruptible, but they are the best determinants we have for soberly determining whether or not foul play may have occurred. And if they determine that it has, they present their case through the courts which determines whether or not the evidence is sufficiently damning to warrant punishment except for the press which sometimes irresponsibly throws it out to everyone. I'm sure you don't trust these institutions but the reason we depend on them in these situations is so that if someone is accused of wrongdoing and if there are inconsistencies in the evidence damning an individual that the accused can be presumed innocent in the absence of sufficient proof. If you've been on the receiving end of any such accusation that's the only piece of humanity likely to be afforded you. Conspiracy theory greatly undermines this. You certainly have a right to think what you will and you certainly can express your opinions but if you blow off the structure that we've collectively built and entrusted to handle this, then you are going to be subjected to a certain degree of ridicule.
    1
  1195. "Innocent people who just want their freedom from Assad…" That's a really curious statement. I know the Assad regime and that of his father were and are highly oppressive and I understand why someone living in Syria might "want freedom" but to support the elimination of the regime makes one a rebel and there's no such thing as an innocent rebel. They may be people deserving of our sympathy and they may be worth supporting and protecting, but if they're actively seeking freedom from Assad one thing they are not is innocent.
    1
  1196. What kind of normal person would go into public service if that is the atmosphere they'd have to breathe? We have to have some tolerance for the occasional faux pas and some respect for politicians who work hard to take care of their constituents otherwise, the only people in these positions will be those who have enough personal power to plough their way through a scandal and are therefore uncontrollable.
    1
  1197. What a political statement. I wouldn't be so sure there were no scandals; no scandals came to light, and no I'm not insinuating anything. Office holders are both politicians and public servants and the ones that do it well should be respected and, except when exposed as criminal or unethical, allowed to do their job. In my opinion Al Franken did his job well. Political liability or not, from a public service standpoint our loss of Franken as a Senator is severe.
    1
  1198. You should get glasses.
    1
  1199. The American people don't want a president that shows respect to our allies or to our competitors, but that's exactly what we need. Biden is caught between exceptionalist America mythology and ordinary America reality.
    1
  1200. There is no normal. China didn't win anything, they suffered a lot at the hands of this disease, but they probably will come out of this mess as well off as anybody.
    1
  1201. More likely the Saudis or Emiratis.
    1
  1202.  @chihyutam4913  I hope you are right. The last thing I ever want to see is a war between the United States and China, proxy or otherwise.
    1
  1203.  @deebil8099  I do not realize that, and I do not think it is true, at least not in the vicinity of the Chinese mainland. I do believe that the U.S. Navy is more powerful than the PLA Navy, but location matters. That's not to say that China would win, but the possibility is distinct.
    1
  1204.  @juniorgod321  I think that food and shelter should be guaranteed even if you’re not willing to work, but I also feel like if you're able-bodied and receiving food and shelter that it's not unreasonable to compel you to work if you are not at least trying to find a job.
    1
  1205.  @juniorgod321  Hmm, interesting point. I certainly don't believe that either chattel slavery or race-based slavery is acceptable. I don't think anyone should be able to own another person. I do think there may be a time and a place for compelled labor though. Does that, in-and-of-itself, constitute slavery? We usually don't refer to prison labor as slavery, but I could see an argument for it. What I'm advocating is for someone who could do a reasonable amount of work but refuses to do so, to be compelled to through authority rather than through abject misery. I'd prefer a society that didn't allow people to wallow in poverty even if they want to, and I certainly would rather live in a society where people weren't allowed to neglect themselves and their surroundings to the point that they poison the public environment.
    1
  1206.  @BlackEpyon  Well that will eliminate everything the Epoch Times writes about China.
    1
  1207.  @MrFlatage  The Bay of Pigs was no naval assault, it was an attempt to land a bunch of Cuban expats in hopes of inducing a coups.
    1
  1208.  @MrFlatage  We've been discussing the efficacy of the PLAN and the USN. You brought up the Bay of Pigs in this discussion. My point is that the Bay of Pigs fiasco is not an indication of weakness in the U.S. Navy.
    1
  1209.  @mozaix1  China is focused on Taiwan and they will make no claim on Russian governed territory until well after the Taiwan situation is taken care of. I think Russia is more concerned about this issue eventually manifesting than China is and I think it's part of the reason the movement towards comradery between the two was such a delicate dance. The possibility of maintaining the buffer zone in the Ukraine at the cost of driving Finland into the arms of NATO is a huge potential risk for Russia, and it is probably something Putin is watching very closely. He's determined to make sure that there are no new NATO allies on his border, but Finland is much more stable than Ukraine ever was and it would be a lot harder to undermine that determination.
    1
  1210.  @ricoanderson6626  It's not lost ego, it's proximity of a threat. The same logic that says that Russia building up troops on the Ukrainian border is a threatening move also says that bringing a state on Russia's border into NATO is a threatening move. Russia claiming that they should be able to do whatever they want with their military within their own territory is both valid and unacceptable. NATO claiming that a sovereign state like Ukraine should be able to join whatever alliance they can negotiate is also valid but unacceptable. There are no angels here. Both sides are championing their own interest's legitimate point and neither side is acknowledging the other's. Ukraine suffers as the gameboard between the two more powerful posturing opponents.
    1
  1211.  @ricoanderson6626  Well, Russia's taking back Crimea was spurred on by a western-backed coup three months short of an election. Nobody's slate is clean here. As for media propaganda, it's neck deep crap on all sides.
    1
  1212.  @KashiARTW  Who exactly do you think has the power to do that?
    1
  1213. Admiral King was born in Ohio. Nimitz grew up in the middle of Texas. If you're willing to serve in another country's navy, I'm sure there is a place for you.
    1
  1214. That is not correct. The United States is still very much a superpower and will likely be so for the foreseeable future.
    1
  1215.  @evanangeletos964  I take it you haven't been to China in the last decade.
    1
  1216. That's the way MAD works.
    1
  1217. It sucks to live in a dystopia……… …for those who don't conform.
    1
  1218. The Fed is restricted by its charter to influence the economy through loans to banks or through the purchase or sale of government bonds. They would be much more effective in a crisis like this if they could pump money directly into households, but they legally can't do that.
    1
  1219. Why fix what ain't broke?
    1
  1220. Hateful people hate Hillary. Unfortunately, that's a substantial portion of the population.
    1
  1221.  @dashriprock8596  No, there's really not, unless you just hate people for being ambitious politicians.
    1
  1222.  @johnli6782  But in a world with no higher authority and powerful hostile agents, you need to cultivate the capacity to fight and win, even if your intentions are peaceful.
    1
  1223.  @testphone8379  By "your own turf", do you mean your own territory? What about disputed territory? What are the territorial concerns of a hegemon? I largely agree that hegemonic powers should respect the neighborhoods of other hegemons. I also believe that small countries owe it to their people to get along with their local hegemons, even if it means occasionally acquiescing to their demands. Hegemons also have an obligation to protect their client states. In the western Pacific one hegemon is growing at another's expense. If we're not willing to discuss the shift in influence openly and honestly, then there is going to be some friction.
    1
  1224.  Mác Đam  You seem to think you know. Are you better connected?
    1
  1225.  @siddhantsingh4870  I've seen no evidence that China tried to hide the virus from the world. It's a totally specious argument.
    1
  1226.  @SpaceMonkeyBoi  China seems to be pretty good at providing housing and services to her people.
    1
  1227.  @SpaceMonkeyBoi  Fair point, although the government usually goes after the people involved in construction failures once they occur.
    1
  1228.  @SpaceMonkeyBoi  Getting rid of corruption is the trick. It's all but impossible unless you have a terrifying secret police force. China had an anticorruption campaign in 2012 that eliminated a great deal of corruption, though clearly not all. It was very popular among ordinary Chinese. My understanding is that Russia has a much greater corruption problem than China. In the United States the illegal corruption problem has been largely eliminated by making it all perfectly legal. ;)
    1
  1229.  @quiropracticoecuador1  Because he undermined the policy of strategic ambiguity.
    1
  1230.  @theresearcher8912  Blockades are a long-standing strategy. A strategy that had a lot to do with the defeat of Germany in the first World War.
    1
  1231. That's kind of how global politics works though.
    1
  1232. These carrier comparisons will get a lot more interesting in about ten to fifteen years.
    1
  1233. That's a pretty easy prophecy to forecast accurately.
    1
  1234.  @markd7824  Democracy is no better or worse than any other system, but if you are a citizen of a democracy you have a duty to both vote and understand what you are voting for. In a democracy the people are the ruler and if they don't make the effort to rule well, then they are just as lousy a ruler as any tin-pot dictator. So please vote.
    1
  1235. And limited by the reality that going to war against today's China in China would be insanely costly and most-likely unsuccessful.
    1
  1236.  @pinky8167  Do you think this would be a fight fought in the middle of the ocean? Because, I don't think anybody else does.
    1
  1237.  @pinky8167  "So, middle of the ocean, not really, but just off the coasts? Yes. " That was my point. China's not going to fight where it can't take advantage of continental assets. I agree with you about the disadvantage China bears regarding the blockading of China through the straits of Malacca, and to a lesser extent at the straits of Hormuz. However, China is not as dependent on these routes as they used to be for resources, and in the future this will be even more the case. Also, China is not as dependent on imports of resources as they once were. China can feed itself if they go back to a rice and vegetables diet. That would undoubtedly be unpopular, but not as unpopular as giving up on the reunification of the country. Fuel is available by rail and by pipeline from Russia and Iran, though this would be in lesser quantities, it probably would be sufficient. Mineral resources can be obtained from central Asia or from within China itself. I don't think that the outcome of a war between the U.S. and China is obvious, and I don't think it's in either country's interest to engage in a real world test. Even winning such a war would be extremely costly, and in the case of an American victory, probably temporary, as China's ambition to reunify and their undoubted view of a loss as a return to the century of humiliation would cause them to lick their wounds and start preparing for a rematch.
    1
  1238.  @alejandromaldonado6159  The problem isn't the judiciary being oversaturated with lawyers. The judiciary should be staffed with legal experts. We want judges who know the law. The problem is that the best paid lawyers work for businesses against government. You could limit the amount of compensation businesses can pay lawyers to even out the field, or at least you could if businesses weren't paying lawyers to write the laws and paying legislators, most of whom are lawyers, to pass those laws. The only way to make that happen is for voters to punish legislators for writing tax laws with loopholes, and that requires voters to actively research what their representatives are passing, and to not buy in to the anti-government/pro-business liberal propaganda that passes for personal liberty advocacy in this country. Don't hold your breath.
    1
  1239. I doubt S. Korea will get involved at all. They have far too much to lose. It's likely that they won't even allow use of ports and airfields. Also, I doubt that the Philippines will be much of a factor either. Letting the U.S. use their territory means that China will have the green light to bombard them with missiles. Japan will probably side wholeheartedly with the U.S. and that may make the difference in China's decision. They have to assume that they're not just facing off against the United States.
    1
  1240. Perhaps the protesters should come up with a reasonable and realistic set of demands, negotiate, and quit moving the goalposts when the government agrees to one of their terms.
    1
  1241. Yeah, she's confusing bribery with extortion.
    1
  1242.  @kabzaify  Some of that depends on your definition of defeat. If NATO put everything they had into it and stayed the course then I believe they could push Russia out of the territory that Ukraine held prior to 2014. I think a push into 2014 Russia would probably have similar results to 1812 and 1944.
    1
  1243. @Hurted Lion Without that agreement Hong Kong would be treated the same as other Chinese cities by the central government.
    1
  1244.  @madafakahakunamatata8269  Of course Taiwan is part of China.
    1
  1245. How can you tell when someone's not willing to check their stereotype? Besides, this guy is not an official.
    1
  1246. It won't be further, it'll just be uglier.
    1
  1247.  errol kong  Certainly there would be attempts to get protesters out of the airport and restrict their access on their way in. I don't think we know what methods would be resorted to in order to make that happen. There are a lot of variables (which city, how long, how disruptive). I think most American police forces would be as skittish about violently clearing out an airport as the Hong Kong police have been though. Nobody wants to have a massacre on their hands.
    1
  1248. Doesn't it hurt to hate so deeply? It can't be good for the brain.
    1
  1249.  @sarinsarin7898  You obviously hate. The quality of Chinese manufacturing and engineering today is world class. If you got Chinese crap, it's because you ordered Chinese crap. The Chinese are perfectly willing to accommodate your parsimony. As for copying, of course they copy. It's the most efficient way to catch up on technologies that are already established. In fact, not copying would be an act of stupidity. And if there is one thing the Chinese aren't, it's stupid.
    1
  1250.  @pascal9055  I would like your comment if not for the bit between the parentheses.
    1
  1251. Why on Earth would you think an ambassador would not be representing the foreign ministry?
    1
  1252. 4:41 Oh it changed Chinese policy all right. Now China is more determined than ever meet their technological needs in house. And their new policies are designed to make sure that they are never dependent on the United States or our allies for anything ever again.
    1
  1253. If the United States puts down the ultimatum that you interact with us if you interact with China, then you should recognize that relationship as toxic beyond its value. The world probably should have recognized this when the U.S. took this approach regarding trade with Iran, though it's understandable considering the costs of crossing the U.S. was definitely more considerable than the cost of abandoning Iran in the near term. Cutting ties with China is a much bigger sacrifice.
    1
  1254.  @ricosauve5  Yeah, for those who now have longer hours it's certainly the case that they are working more. And I think that the concept of what you could get back in 1970 for a given wage vs. what you get now is even more skewed because in 1970 television was free. Local phone service was free (though long distance was very expensive). Internet didn't exist. Parks and museums were free. A lot of things just don't translate across the years. You can't fix a car on your own these days, they're too complicated. i feel like we have a lot more financial obligations than we did. Companies used to take on the cost of training employees. Now they expect employees to show up trained, at their own cost. My point earlier was that the reason we're more productive now is because of technology, not because we're better workers now than we were back in the day. In fact, considering our trending physiology (mine included), I think the reverse argument could be made. Of course, firms aren't intrinsically better now either. The benefits of that increased production should be shared with increases in worker wages (or similar payouts with fewer hours) matching increases in profits dollar for dollar. Of course that's not how markets work though.
    1
  1255.  @ricosauve5  It's certainly gotten to the point that people who operate cities cannot afford to live in them. People are having to commute ridiculous distances which costs them money and time. At some point that's going to have to be adjusted. The problem is that so many of us have invested in real estate that addressing the problem is political suicide.
    1
  1256. @sploofmonkey It's not the elites that deliberately have jacked up the price of property, it's the market that has non-deliberately jacked up the price of property. It doesn't really matter though. The market isn't going to fix the problem and at some point we're going to have to quit depending on it to fix these problems.
    1
  1257. @sploofmonkey Most people live in cities because when opportunity dries up in the countryside, those with any kind of ambition gravitate to where the opportunities exist—cities. City life has its costs. You have to interact and cooperate, follow the rules, written and/or unwritten. Surveillance is a useful tool for identifying potential problems. It's also highly vulnerable to abuse.
    1
  1258.  @tompain2751  A market's correction doesn't necessarily help those who need it most. In an environment with a labor surplus the correct market is absolutely brutal towards unskilled or obsolete-skill labor. What we're seeing with urban land values is an obscenely rich customer base driving the market price into the stratosphere. The existence of that customer base is largely the result of government non-interference coupled with technological advances that together exacerbate resource inequality. If allowed to continue unabated it won't be the market that adjusts, but rather the mob.
    1
  1259.  @tompain2751  A risky proposition. But then again, no risk—no reward. There's certainly nothing wrong with being an entrepreneur, but we don't need enough crap for everyone to be one.
    1
  1260.  @derekrck  We need to support those workers who can be high-skilled to become so, but there are a couple more things we need to consider. First of all, some workers cannot achieve, for various reasons, those high skill sets. We need to make sure that they are not written off. Also, the more high-skilled workers we have, the less valuable they are individually. Y'know, supply and demand and all that. It's important that we pay attention to the high-skilled labor market and make adjustments necessary so that those who have invested in high skills don't become so available that they can't recover that investment through wages, and also that their skills don't become obsolete before they have the opportunity to profit from them. And lastly, while I definitely recognize the evolution of our economy from industrial to service, we still need to make sure we're not so devoid of industry that we cannot support our industrial needs in times of crisis.
    1
  1261. kuiousitykat - except that because machines are more efficient owners than people…
    1
  1262.  @squishypillow6673  Lord Farquad was much more articulate.
    1
  1263. Hopefully China won't be as much of an ass about this as the United States is, though they would admittedly have every right to.
    1
  1264.  @kennnone151  I'm not so sure we don't steal technology. If the U.S. is behind in a field (and there are a few where that is the case) and we're not stealing when we have the opportunity to, then I'd like a word with our intelligence agencies because they're not using my tax money effectively.
    1
  1265. So, 2049?
    1
  1266.  @azzir325  More like 39 to 41 percent, but you're right, it's still a substantial fraction.
    1
  1267.  @Kermit_T_Frog  Where I differ from the revolutionaries is that my observations of revolution suggest that the suffering involved is unconscionable. Once the powers that be are converted into corpses and exiles, the revolutionary factions usually turn on each other. The victorious faction, having killed off the others, then starts a paranoid search for impurities within their own ranks. And when all that's left are the dead and the terrified, the system that emerges is rarely an improvement on the one that was overthrown.
    1
  1268.  @Kermit_T_Frog  I didn't know that, but I wouldn't be surprised.
    1
  1269. People who want to keep working and who have the capacity to safely do so should be allowed to do so, but I think it's a mistake to push the retirement age back. People are supposed to benefit from medical and technological advances. Folks who have given forty years of labor to society should be able to relax in their final years—hopefully decades—if that's what they want to do. I don't think there is a real shortage of labor that can't be filled by technology and definitely nothing that can't be filled by immigrants looking for a better life. It may be that as industries automate that more of their new found profits will have to be diverted from stock portfolios into state administered pensions. Tragic as that may be for the current leisure class, it would probably make life much more tolerable for those elders that actually contributed to society and their supporting children and grandchildren.
    1
  1270.  @JeroenvanHaren  And Israel retaliated for October 7 by flattening Gaza.
    1
  1271. MacArthur wanted to attack China directly during the Korean Civil War. Of course, he got fired in part because of that.
    1
  1272. Gotta start somewhere.
    1
  1273.  @sydeLPS  So how much does the guy at the top get paid?
    1
  1274. My dream ticket would be Pete Buttigieg and Stacey Abrams. It would be nice to see that in 2028.
    1
  1275.  @oneviwatara9384  Only Aksai Chin and Ladakh
    1
  1276. So, hundreds of thousands of potential criminals are shot each year?
    1
  1277. Nobody's arguing that guns are driving people to commit mass shootings, what's being argued is that the easy access to guns provides those who are driven to mass shootings the means to execute that ambition.
    1
  1278. Mr. Money, I think you're giving too much credit to the gun. The sound of someone saying "Hey what the hell do think you're doing?" will turn the average home invader into Jesse Owens.
    1
  1279. Whether it started in China or not, they are not guilty of anything.
    1
  1280. Protesting is an indication of civil unrest.
    1
  1281. I got it, but there is no way I would have come up with the solution in the "few minutes" the monster was asleep. Thank God the world wasn't depending on me.
    1
  1282.  @neilwalsh3977  It's very important for the leaders of the two most important countries in the world to communicate regularly. It was probably important and necessary for the Chinese to demonstrate that they are not at the U.S. president's beck and call, but now that that point has been made the need to stay diplomatically involved at the highest level should be the running priority.
    1
  1283.  @yuriypr72  I remember Russians talking about it in the nineties. Americans weren't particularly interested in listening to those voices. The Russians were okay with having a united Germany in NATO but they were complaining when Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined. They were absolutely furious when the Baltic states joined in '04 and the United States just told them to pound sand.
    1
  1284. And both the suggestion from the Chinese Foreign Minister that the U.S. imported the virus into China and the description of the virus as Chinese from Trump and others were messed up, terribly unhelpful and mean-spirited.
    1
  1285.  @danielrodrigues4903  We're probably going to have to enhance our own intelligence by merging with AI. The age of cyborgs will soon be upon us. Otherwise we risk becoming irrelevant.
    1
  1286.  @obsoletelobster9258  You're comparing apples to oranges here. If you are comparing similar tech companies to Huawei the comparison would look like this. While one company wants to know everything about you, track you, and use that information to profit on you, and the other wants to know everything about you, track you, and use that information to profit on you as well as to perhaps benefit the communist party - some might consider their motive to be much more devious.
    1
  1287. I'm sorry, but Guangdong food is some of the most boring food in China. Shenzhen has a really great seafood market though. So long as the seafood's fresh, you really don't have to do much to it. Just steam it and go.
    1
  1288. I hope Biden somehow sees this.
    1
  1289.  @godzillamothra5983  There is a degree of hypocrisy because Russia is supporting separatist movements in Ukraine and Georgia while China is itself suppressing separatist movements in its own territory and generally opposes separatism everywhere such as the Catalonian separatists in Spain. Russia has put China in an uncomfortable spot on this issue, but they have a common grievance when it comes to encirclement which seems to be emerging as the overriding concern in their collective eyes. When you play high-stakes diplomacy, it's pretty much impossible to avoid all instances of hypocrisy.
    1
  1290. There is something to that. If she stayed she could end up like Bismark or Churchill, rejected and frustrated. Though history remembers them favorably.
    1
  1291. If it's under the US Air Force then it's not a 5th military branch.
    1
  1292.  @matthewbaldwin964  Yeah, I should have checked before I spoke, though it really doesn't make sense to me.
    1
  1293.  @muchadoaboutnothing6196  I always thought of the Marine Corps as a corps rather than a branch. It's tiny next to the Army and the Air Force. I have a lot of respect for Marines; I got along well with them when I was in the Army and I'm not trying to diminish them in any way here but as part of the Navy I never considered them a branch of service.
    1
  1294.  @javanzy280  It's not just about rights, it's also about perceptions, expectations, and practical results.
    1
  1295.  @phasorthunder1157  China's economy has been growing since the end of the Second World War. It took off like a rocket under Deng Xiaoping in large part because of the encouragement of private businesses and partnerships, but the economy has always been controlled by the state.
    1
  1296. There is no need for the Chinese to be enemies of the United States, so long as the United States recognizes China's right to be China.
    1
  1297.  @agris8859  I deeply apologize. I had a long wordy reply and somehow I hit the keyboard in such away to erase it all. I'm not going to try to rewrite it. I do appreciate your willingness to debate in depth. I'm sorry that I am unwilling to respond in kind right now.
    1
  1298.  Russo21 Zir  Most of those folks are not going to be able to trade with Russia because of the actions regarding SWIFT. The glaring exception to that will be China who can trade with Russia regardless of whether or not dollars are involved and who probably recognize their interest in making sure that the SWIFT sanctions are not ultimately successful.
    1
  1299. I disagree. I think China is bluffing this time, but in a decade they won't be. If China is humiliated now though, the future is going to be U-G-L-Y when they finally do pull the trigger and reunify through overwhelming force in the 2030s.
    1
  1300.  @mikeyu3243  God I hope you are wrong.
    1
  1301. I must have been sleeping, when did Trump repent for a mistake?
    1
  1302. @Gary Krug Hungary was an Axis country, Russia stabbed them in the face. Estonia and Latvia were absorbed in the thirties. China's not trying to take anything from freedom loving people. Freedom loving people are trying to take an awful lot from China. China is strong, they'll survive anything short of a global catastrophe. I wish I could say the same about the United States. I'm optimistic though. I think both countries can have a great future so long as they don't decide to go to war with each other.
    1
  1303. While American meddling carries its share of blame for crises all over the place, this particular dumpster fire is more the fault of American allies, notably France and Britain.
    1
  1304. It's a matter of perspective.
    1
  1305.  @robertaspindale2531  I agree, but then again, I share your perspective. Iran's critics do not share our perspective. They view Iran as a terrorist nation. They would argue that Iran is engaging in hostile actions with countries they are not at war with through proxy groups like Hezbollah or the Yemeni Houthis and that this is merely turnabout. There were some troubling assassinations in Argentina a few years back that have been blamed on the Iranians. Of course Iranians could point to the brazen assassination of some of their scientists a while back too. Targeted assassination has become a far too commonly used tool by all sides, and frankly, we all need to stop doing this. I'm not holding my breath though.
    1
  1306. Yes, we should be applauding China and Russia for their efforts. The world is going to need all the vaccine it can get. If China and Russia can play a positive role in this battle, it should trump any fear of soft power diplomacy stoked by their detractors. China and Russia have issues and some of those issues are legitimate concerns. But suggesting that they shouldn't be allowed to help out third countries because we don't want them to have a better global reputation is repugnant. And if there is any justice in the world, it should scar our reputation deeply and irreparably should we continue to push that narrative.
    1
  1307. You missed Jack Ma, and maybe Benjamin Netanyahu.
    1
  1308.  @ezra5788  Iran's not that small. Granted, they're not the military juggernaut that is America, but they're not some little backward kingdom either. I don't think they could alone stand up to the full onslaught of an American invasion, assuming America had somewhere to invade from. I don't know if Pakistan or Turkey would agree to stage our army.
    1
  1309.  @monopalle5768  Victory has never been achieved from the air. Bombing galvanizes the defenders. Tanks and infantry with air superiority is the most likely victory combination if you define victory as crushing the enemy's defenses. If you view that as merely phase one of victory, then things get a lot more complicated.
    1
  1310.  @mojitocod  It's great if you're the benefiting nation and it sucks if you're not. Of course if you have the power to alter the geography, you can use the law against those who can't. This law clearly favors the Greeks. And it will continue to do so so long as Turkey is not strong enough to change either the game or the gameboard. I'm not saying whether it's good or bad.
    1
  1311.  @mojitocod  I mean the islands already existed in nature as islands.
    1
  1312.  @mojitocod  I don't know that Greece is acting "Maximalistic" at this time. Their footprint all across the Aegean and up through Rhodes and Cyprus into the Levantine Basin sure tightly hugs the Turkish coastline at some distance—in some cases a tortured distance—form the Greek mainland. It doesn't mean that it's unjustified. The people that live on those islands are Greek and so long as Greece lives up to its obligations to take care of those islands and the people that live on them then they have a legitimate claim on them. If uninhabited or barely inhabited islands are claimed just to extend control over waters according to the international law, especially if you're doing this to choke off a rival, then that would be maximalistic. I don't know that Greece is doing this; they certainly have the kind of footprint that suggests they've done it in the past though.
    1
  1313. I really don't see South Korea, the Philippines or Vietnam rushing out to support Taiwan in the event that China decides to advance. That said, U.S. support alone is pretty effective and probably enough to thwart a Chinese initiative for the next five years or so.
    1
  1314.  @learningagain4094  Japan might.
    1
  1315.  @mariahharney7766  A tanky is a derogatory term for people who defend China in these kinds of debates.
    1
  1316.  Andrew Corrie  That's true, but it's also irrelevant to the original question.
    1
  1317. I've got answers, but nobody is going to make the changes we need to make.
    1
  1318.  @yt.damian  I don't think a Russian disintegration is likely either, but we're discussing it.
    1
  1319.  @MrFasho123  You have a good point. There are so many contradictory historical claims that it would be not just ridiculous, but impossible to try to honor them all. It's really a matter of congruance between a historical claim and the position of power to act on it. The oldest enforced historical claim that I'm aware of is the Jewish historical claim on the southwestern Levant, which had lain dormant for over eighteen hundred years. So whether or not a claim is considered acceptable doesn't seem to ride as much on factors of time as it does on factors of political usefullness, internal or external, of those who are in a position to mandate acceptability. I suspect that China, at some point, will enforce a claim on Outer Mongolia. Those inside China and their allies will consider it to be a valid claim based on the territorial borders of the Qing Dynasty. Those outside China will consider it an occupation. That's politics.
    1
  1320.  @MrFasho123  It's hard to think of anyone finding it in their interest to support Mongolian territorial claims just because of the sheer amount of contries that would be negatively affected. Mongolia would have to become a superpower on its own to even attempt to enforce any claims based on the Mongol conquest of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries—but again, that's just politics. China could actually make claims on Yuan Dynasty territorial holdings, as they consider it to be a Chinese dynasty, despite the ruling class being exclusively made up of Mongols. Of course China doesn't consider other Mongol khanates to be part of the Yuan dynasty though, so central Asia, Russia and eastern Europe are probably safe from Chinese claims. As for Israel, the Jews of Europe considered it a territorial homeland and from their perspective it was a valid territorial claim. European support for the establishment of the state, in my opinion, was driven largely by guilt associated withthe holocaust and the recognition of institutional antisemitism over centuries. American support of Israel, which came later, appears to be driven by the legitimate representation of and sympathy for a strong and prosperous Jewish constituency within the United States as well as anti-Arab (and other peoples within the region) sentiment derived originally from the OPEC oil crisis and PLO terrorism in the seventies but exacerbated by the Iranian Revolution, Al Qaeda terrorism, and ISIS terrorism more recently, as well as opportunism and disappointment regarding former Soviet clients who refuse to collapse now that our former adversary has left the scene.
    1
  1321.  @errormatrix4159  Don't hold your breath.
    1
  1322. It's the only satellite that can't be shot out of the sky.
    1
  1323. I'm glad the lines of communication are clear. Fighting over a tiny piece of land that nobody can live on based on whether or not to recognize the border of a British imperialist is beneath of you.
    1
  1324. There are some things that are very poignant and very perceptive in this presentation. There are also things that are very troubling. The road to hell may be paved with good intentions, particularly pretentious good intentions, but I don't believe that to be a good argument that good intentions should be abandoned. As an example, if we look back at medicine over the last two-hundred years and we see many examples of misunderstanding and treatment that was unhelpful or even harmful and we know that there will be treatments prescribed today that will be proven later to be contradictory to intention. But we still are healthier as a whole than the generations that filled those two centuries. On balance, those good intentions have had positive results for our species. On balance we are better off for the execution of good intentions.
    1
  1325. The multiplier effect that Obama referenced here is "the truth", but it's not the whole truth. Banks lending money to businesses and households give businesses and households the opportunity to buy goods and services now that they otherwise wouldn't be able to buy. Some of those goods and services can allow businesses and households (much more so businesses than households) to put themselves in a position to improve their income through upgrading. They also give other businesses an opportunity to increase their income through the sales of said goods and services which ideally leads to higher wages and employment. Whether this works out to an eight-fold increase in funds access could be debated; I think that's a pretty optimistic suggestion. The reason this is truth but not the whole truth is because there are assumptions in this model, both assumed and ignored, which are problematic, the biggest assumed assumption is that increases in sales will result in increases in wages and employment. Some of this is likely to occur but because businesses run on a profit motive and shareholder's interests are legally prioritized, wages and employment won't be increased unless the businesses see a short term benefit which outweighs through a myopic cost-benefit analysis other options such as automation and consolidation. The biggest ignored assumption is that eventually the piper has to be paid. Loose lending in the near term is counterbalanced by income tightening in the medium term as interest payments infect business and household budgets. Bullish economists have to assume that business and household income increases will be sufficient to compensate for this strangling effect and that they will be durable enough to continue over time. In the absence of strong natural income growth which is dependent on a tightening labor market (something we haven't seen in this country for years and are unlikely ever to see again) the answer has been to keep massaging the banking industry into reinjecting money into the economy through easy lending to businesses and households (and in the case of Republicans reducing taxes on business and collapsing the regulatory structure of the country which has colossal consequences I'm not going to get into here). This leads to periodic crashes. Our unwillingness to centralize our economy means that we are never going to be able to take an effective big-picture approach to stabilizing our economy and we'll be forever dependent on banking gimmicks to get us temporarily past the latest crash which works remarkably well for the people with enough money to float above the chaos. More centralized economies when operated by competent technocrats like those in East Asia are less volatile because they do take a big-picture approach but they eventually stagnate because no system is as efficient as do-or-die capitalism. I forgot where I was going with this so I'm going to stop. Thanks for reading.
    1
  1326. I wish there could have been an answer to that last point. I may not be as articulate as Prof. Mahbubani, but I'd like to take a stab at it. Whether or not there is a "winner" of "the next cold war" is something that is probably far enough in the future as to be unforeseeable at the moment. What will happen, and what is happening, is a balancing of power between a United States that has been unchallenged in power over the last three decades, and an ascendant China that has found its groove and is now feeling like they are coming fast in reach of the United States in power and influence. A hot war between the two in the present or near future would bring both countries down in power and influence, and both sides are probably aware of that. Unless China initiates a war to repatriate Taiwan or the United States starts a war to prevent Chinese ascension, China's influence in Asia will grow and the influence of the United States in Asia will wane. India is at the edge of that region, and most likely will either fall under greater Chinese influence or suffer the consequences of spitting in the eye of the regional power player. I think in that respect, India is at risk of siding with the "losing" side in Asia, not necessarily the world. The other point I think requires rebuttal is that Xi Jinping is adopting authoritarian processes because he sees fundamental problems in China and he's afraid that liberalization will cost him his power. I think Xi Jinping enjoys power and he's put it to good use in China by-and-large. Embracing authoritarianism I think has little or nothing to do with paranoia in China at this date. I think it has a lot more to do with effective government, especially when compared to liberal systems over the last decade, and not trying to fix what doesn't seem to be broken. China's return to pre-eminence has strengthened China on the world stage while simultaneously improved the lives of the Chinese people to a degree that really hasn't been seen in a large country since the Roosevelt administration in the United States. Chinese memory (and in some cases living memory) of weak government is one of misery, corruption and emasculation, and neither the government nor the people of China have any desire to see that again. So any real danger of system collapse from within China is probably a few generations out, and I seriously doubt Xi Jinping is fretting about that right now.
    1
  1327. Don't count your chickens before they hatch.
    1
  1328. I really hope you're right. I just can't get over the scars of previous instances when I had confidence in positive results and it exploded in my face.
    1
  1329. Well, here's to your hope. Be careful about throwing too much shade at moderate Democrats though, that's how you create new Republicans and ruin that demographic trend you're counting on.
    1
  1330.  @ericw996  Denial sounds like a lot of work. Maybe you should just relax and accept the reality for what it is.
    1
  1331.  @ericw996  Reality accepted. Thanks.
    1
  1332.  @ericw996  So long as we don't talk politics.
    1
  1333.  @nopushbutton  I love Disney in general, but that's one of the few where I read the book first, and it's painful to watch. Same for Hercules.
    1
  1334. This really isn't the time to blame India. Right now, they just need everyone's help, and lots of it.
    1
  1335. Not this year it's not.
    1
  1336. SZX
    1
  1337.  @nematolvajkergetok5104  We're all biased, and it's very difficult to overcome those biases when it comes to judging alternating statistics and news reports accurately.
    1
  1338. I'm sure they'll love living in such a racially hostile environment.
    1
  1339. The Chinese would still consider themselves red and they would be the senior partner in that coalition.
    1
  1340.  @刘涛-x7g2i  The Communist Party has done a lot for the people of China. I don't doubt for a moment that the populace would rally quickly and wholeheartedly.
    1
  1341.  @istvancsiszar1118  Communist in China is about as correct a term as liberal is in America. Authenticity is rarely prioritized in politics.
    1
  1342. These Chinese sound very American. Way to cover the spectrum there.
    1
  1343. More and more countries are trying to get into BRICS. Those countries are not going to work against Russia. A lot of these countries see the west as the aggressive party, and they now have other trade and investment pitch options.
    1
  1344. A more likely scenario is that we are characters in a story. Or more accurately the descendants of ancestors of characters in a story. No glitches, no high-end computer tech required. We create universes all the time in fictional literature and the characters within believe they are real as does everyone else in that universe, in its past and in its future unless we expressly write otherwise. And from their perspective they are real and their universe is whatever it has to be to have been real at the time of the story and it most likely plays out logically after the story is over. The further a character is from the plot line, the more free will he can exercise and the less "divine guidance" he receives.
    1
  1345. If the fall of a regime were caused by or resulted in violence then many a tear would be shed. The regime so far seems pretty stable even in the face of monumental adversity. I don't see a tearless scenario for regime change in Iran.
    1
  1346. The WHO investigators should follow the evidence where it leads and everyone else should quit trying to apportion blame.
    1
  1347. I could just see his platform: "I hate China more than everybody else combined."
    1
  1348. It's nice that Sam and others on the left are willing to admit that they screwed up. It's what makes us better people. It's too bad it's seen as weakness and costs us politically, proof once again that our electorate is broken.
    1
  1349. They may have been. That may or may not be figured out by the investigative team.
    1
  1350. I think it unlikely that they are getting more than moral support from the US and UK.
    1
  1351. The KMT is Beijing's preferred party in Taiwan. At least they can work with them.
    1
  1352. Ian Bremmer described Trump's negotiating strategy well. He sits at the table and throws so much into the pot that you have no choice but to fold. Therefore the only entities that might be able to resist capitulation against his threat of tariffs and isolation are China, the EU if it can stay united, and the countries that are already under that thumb like Russia and Iran who have, at great cost to their economies, already adjusted to that reality.
    1
  1353.  @eedragonr1576  Hong Kong's legal rights exist at the pleasure of China. The PRC has been pretty damned lenient regarding this whole affair, mostly I suspect because it wants to be seen as acknowledging the legal rights that it allows to exist.
    1
  1354.  @eedragonr1576  You don't get out much, do you?
    1
  1355.  @eedragonr1576  Out in the world. Legal rights are defined and enforced by the state, sometimes at the behest of the people. If the state you're in recognizes legal rights for you, then you have them. If the state you're in does not, then good luck exercising them. By the way I apologize for being so snarky in my comment. It wasn't very nice of me.
    1
  1356.  @eedragonr1576  In a democracy The People is the ruler of the state. Legal rights are provided by the representative lawmakers on behalf of The People and protected by the courts on behalf of The Law. Whatever legal rights an individual has in this system are bestowed by The People through their lawmakers. These rights may provide justice, or they may deny it, depending on the capriciousness of The People. I don't think Hong Kong is a true democracy. It has democratic elements because the people are allowed to choose representatives from among those approved by the CCP in Beijing. That same CCP is still the ruler of the state even though the City of Hong Kong has strong autonomous elements. This is how the central government interprets the One Country-Two Systems system to work in Hong Kong. Because of this, legal rights are defined by lawmakers who are chosen by The People from among those acceptable to The Party, meaning that the CCP has a huge amount of influence in the definition of legal rights bestowed. You may feel that there are "Natural Rights" ( Life, Liberty, Property as the French might suggest). These are declared by some to be "inalienable" but these are only legal rights if they are enacted into law and they are only functional rights if defended by the courts and acknowledged by the authorities.
    1
  1357.  @eedragonr1576  Just as a historical note, the vast majority of civilizations throughout history have been extremely stingy in the distribution of individual liberties. I would very much disagree with your statement that "without their existence their is no civilization". You might not want to live in some of those civilizations, but that doesn't make them non-civilizations. I don't know that I'd agree about Revolutions being kinder, gentler, more agreeable arrangements than their predecessors. Revolutions generate a lot of chaos, economies usually crash and careers are destroyed, often people are killed. It's a good chance to distribute a little personal vengeance, neighbor-to-neighbor, new-regime-to-old-regime, faction-to-faction. I would never trust my future to a revolutionary given any other options.
    1
  1358. That's the great irony. War is horrible, about as horrible as anything can be, but the machines of war are frickin' awesome, awesome to the point where it's almost worth it.
    1
  1359. Impeachment is entirely the purview of the House of Representatives. It cannot be stopped by the Senate. However, having been impeached he would remain in office unless convicted by two thirds of the Senate, still nonetheless impeached.
    1
  1360. You are incorrect. The House holds impeachment hearings and votes on impeachment. Once impeached the Senate holds hearings on conviction and removal from office and votes on that.
    1
  1361.  @testphone8379  I don't know if China has enough missiles to overwhelm fleet defenses. They might.
    1
  1362.  @testphone8379  I have not. Some argue that Chinese steel production is reliant on other countries for coal and iron ore. Whether or not they could replace those materials with domestic or reliable rail-route sources is beyond my knowledge. I think some of China's imports are optional—why not use up other peoples' resources now and save yours for later?—but it takes a while to set up new iron mines.
    1
  1363.  @testphone8379  I'm sure that would be the case.
    1
  1364. True, but what you're claiming are not facts.
    1
  1365. I disagree. Neocons want to win wars. They want to spread liberal democracy across the globe. It's kind of a religious thing. It's not about reality, it's a matter of faith. The fact that they can get rich in the process and help their neocon brothers and sisters get rich as well, that just proves that liberal democracy smiles on them. As for the men and women who have to die to spread the faith, well, every movement has its martyrs.
    1
  1366. I applaud Mr. Yeo's attempt to come up with a workable solution, but I don't think that the Chinese people would permit the Chinese government to except such a solution, especially if it's described as a permanent solution. I'm convinced that if Taiwan doesn't negotiate itself into a peaceful "One China" reunification, it's going to find itself forcibly integrated with terms being dictated to them. What I would like to see, but almost certainly won't, is the legalization in China of the Chinese People's Party (Guomindang) in the Special Economic Zones, as well as Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan, with the party headquarters being housed in Taipei (I'd also like to see the CPC return their headquarters back to Yenan). People in the SEZs could choose either a candidate from the CPC or from the KMT to represent them in the National People's Congress in Beijing. I'd also suggest that the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress include within their ranks both the Chairman of the CPC and the Chairman of the KMT. This would be referred to, of course, as the Third United Front, and it would be imperative that the two parties remained united in the service of the Chinese People going forward where current standards of solidarity regarding policy within the Standing Committee are maintained and expressing disunity remain grounds for dismissal even from party chairmanship. I'd suggest that outside of Taiwan and Hong Kong, that campaigning be tightly restricted to avoid the kind of electoral circus that we see in so much of the world, and that within these two regions campaign standards be determined by the local governments. I'd like to think that this Third United Front could unify China in such a way that minimizes catastrophe and allows for all sides to feel comfortable within the one country. There are, of course, serious problems with this suggestion. The first problem is that I'm an American and there is no reason anyone in China has any reason to listen to me. The second is that the CPC is not just a political party. The CPC is the foundation for the People's Republic of China in the same way that the Constitution is the foundation of the United States. The CPC is the institution that the Chinese people trust when it comes to government and asking it to share authority with another party is a degradation of that foundation. Because of the KMT's history, it would be the least degrading and most acceptable party possible. After all, the KMT and CPC were united against the Japanese invasion in WWII, and there are KMT figures who are venerated in communist China, particularly Sun Yatsen. President Xi has been strengthening the CPC's role in the fabric of the PRC and I suspect he would be a strong critic of any approach resembling this one. Nonetheless, I think it would be the best option, but like I said before, "Ain't nobody gonna listen to me!" Let's hope though for an eventually peaceful reunification either way.
    1
  1367.  @Xialoh  I can't wait.
    1
  1368. Brandi, if you really think the Democrats and the Republicans are the same thing than you need to look more closely because they are polar opposites regarding gay rights, educational funding, recognition of climate change, affirmative action, gun control, and the list goes on and on.
    1
  1369.  @adamchase8985  You know what they say, "Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company."
    1
  1370.  @windbagjones2081  Democrats do more for inner-city blacks than Republicans by a long shot. They would do even more if they weren't hampered by Republican opposition, corruption (within the party and outside of it), and the practical limitations of reality. Whether or not they try to do enough (for inner-city blacks as well as for others) is a running debate within the party.
    1
  1371. Go ahead and underestimate Russia. How could that go wrong?
    1
  1372.  @Warp10x  What happens when they get shot down?
    1
  1373.  @Warp10x  They're still big slow targets. And who are they going to bomb anyway? Are they going into Russia? They'll get shot down unless air superiority is established. That would take time to wear down the Russian air forces and anti-aircraft artillery.
    1
  1374.  @Warp10x  Yeah, if it ain't broke…
    1
  1375. At some point someone's going to realize that lighter-than-air airships with dorsal solar arrays and electric engines could do long-haul trips with practically no fuel costs.
    1
  1376.  @youngz13o  It's still kind of sneaky because only China knows what it's hardware is doing back there. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
    1
  1377. Monopolies are fine so long as they are thoroughly regulated to make sure that they are not allowed to abuse their consumers. I would argue that well-regulated monopolies are better for both consumers and workers, and therefore the vast majority of the people, then less regulated free markets, especially over the long term.
    1
  1378. Hong Kong has a huge future if for no other reason than because it sits right next to Shenzhen. Whether that future pivots away from international business towards a more domestic agenda is what we'll have to wait and see.
    1
  1379. You need to change "collapsed" to "in a world with any justice would have collapsed".
    1
  1380. Agreed, but the gap is quickly narrowing.
    1
  1381.  @babyyoda6549  China has no desire to fight the United States, but they do want their province back and they're not afraid to fight to get it back. Their desire isn't to out-do the United States, it's to control their own destiny. Their analysis of the intentions of the United States indicates that in order to do this, they have to have enough military strength to control the waters in the Western Pacific out to the second island chain.
    1
  1382.  @babyyoda6549  China has no fear of Japan or South Korea. Also, it's extremely unlikely that South Korea will attack China, and while Japan is more likely, I wouldn't call it likely.
    1
  1383.  @babyyoda6549  You know how the IJN was defeated, don't you? Japan was unable to produce ships at anything like the rate that the United States could. The same is true in relation to China today. That's not to say that Japan would not be formidable in their own right, or particularly formidable in an alliance with the U.S. Navy, but a modern Japanese navy would not be comparable to what China could produce.
    1
  1384.  @yenphung8809  Oh, I agree.
    1
  1385.  @mranonymous9034  It's a joke about American politics. In 2000 Al Gore was a competent and erudite candidate for President of the United States. He was defeated by George W. Bush who didn't really pretend to be intelligent, but somehow connected with the American electorate. People said that he was the kind of president that you could sit down and have a beer with.
    1
  1386. Joshua Wong is hardly a random guy. He's setting himself up for exile or worse. In his comments today he invoked the fall of the Soviet Union which, frankly, and I don't say this lightly, is treasonous. It's sad to see such a young man embrace martyrdom.
    1
  1387. Thanks, we'll need it.
    1
  1388.  @PIANOPHUNGUY  NATO allies are obligated to send troops to defend Turkey if it is attacked. So long as Turkey is the aggressor NATO allies are not obligated to support the operation, as was the case regarding U.S. operations in Vietnam and Iraq.
    1
  1389.  @CarpsterKing  I don't think a war with China would benefit the United States in any way. And the most it would do for Taiwan is postpone the inevitable for a decade or so, and that's assuming a total American victory to which I share your skepticism. I don't know that the war in Afghanistan is a good model for war in the Pacific. Some of that would depend on China's ability to blockade Taiwan and the willingness on both sides to lose military personnel and extremely high-value capital assets. American access to Taiwan would probably be less problematic than access to Afghanistan. Not everything would have to be airlifted. We would be supporting an existing government that may or may not have majority support in the countryside as well as the cities. The key advantage for the United States would be that the American industrial base would most likely be beyond China's reach. The advantage for China would be a bigger and more efficient industrial base to begin with. The advantage for Taiwan—there is no advantage for Taiwan. It sucks to be a pawn in a contest between mad queens.
    1
  1390. Germany and China are two of the most highly productive locations on the planet and they both have huge market potential. The countries along this route will have a huge opportunity to access these markets, but they're really going to have to work hard to compete with the endpoints.
    1
  1391.  scotiansen  This person may be lukewarm or naive but there is absolutely nothing in their post that suggests they are or they support evil.
    1
  1392. Honest question; I'm not trying to be dismissive. Do vegans consider silk off-limits?
    1
  1393.  @Tomb-Wraith  Thanks
    1
  1394. It looks like there is a paper component. Win, lose or draw somebody should subpoena all those ballots and check all of the ballots that are straight ticket for continuity.
    1
  1395.  @covertpuppytwo3857  These points of view may seem like BS in your eyes, but the Chinese see the world in these very shapes and shades. Your self-righteous dismissal of their concerns will make you friends among China's enemies I'm sure.
    1
  1396. You forgot the stupid layman Alan Friesen theory which suggests that the gravity felt in our universe is a tangential effect of resistance to the flow of two hyperdimensional membranes passing through each other in the same way that the movement of marbles towards a bowling ball on a trampoline is a tangential effect of gravity pulling perpendicularly against the warped plane.
    1
  1397. I think it's a pretty balanced group of pro-mainland nationalists and anti-Chinese sabre rattlers. In both camps, some of them have some idea of what they're talking about, while a slim majority has no clue.
    1
  1398. It happened when Russia was very weak and the U.S. had not yet betrayed them.
    1
  1399.  @Jumptohistory  That will be the end result.
    1
  1400. to be immediately vetoed in the Security Cancel
    1
  1401. The blood is on all our hands and it may never wash off.
    1
  1402. Just for perspective The Washington Times is the Fox News of print media.
    1
  1403. @Player Versus Bird It would show independents that Bernie isn't as closed-minded as some of his rabid supporters and that maybe he might be willing to listen to them as well. Be careful what you wish for. You might not pass that voting test.
    1
  1404.  Hal 9000  I dearly hope you are mistaken.
    1
  1405.  @PolarExplorerGuy  They're implying it because it's a reasonable suspicion based on the evidence that they are presenting. They may be cherry-picking the evidence, but it would not surprise me if they weren't.
    1
  1406.  @trevorpollo  Mr.Schmidt's comment was a false equivalence also.
    1
  1407.  @Rethanos  Perhaps you're not familiar with our immigration scandals.
    1
  1408. A patriotic education, whether in the United States or China, is brainwashing, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's okay to be taught about the awesomeness of your country, so long as the teaching doesn't disparage other countries who may have a different point of view.
    1
  1409.  @叭九餾四  That does not matter.
    1
  1410.  @陽飛-l5v  Taiwan is a province. The definition of country isn't really that fixed. You could, and many would, argue that Wales is a country. It doesn't mean that it's not part of Britain.
    1
  1411.  @KashiARTW  What part of "It doesn't matter" don't you understand?
    1
  1412.  @KashiARTW  You are finally right. I don't matter and neither do you. The people who matter in this situation are the military and political leaders of the PRC and to an ever-lessening degree, the military and political leaders of the USA.
    1
  1413.  @davrothelegend  Taiwan has been part of China in one form or another since Zheng Chenggong ousted the Dutch in 1661 on behalf of the Ming Dynasty, which had collapsed on the Mainland. In 1683 Taiwan was united in governance with the Mainland under the Qing Dynasty. Over the next two centuries Chinese settlers colonized the island and in many cases mixed with the local Taiwanese natives developing an island culture that was largely indistinguishable from that of Mainland China, and clearly part of it. Taiwan was wrested from Qing control in 1898 during the Sino-Japanese War, and it was administered by Japan from 1898 to 1945. During this same period, Japan also administered Korea. In 1945, at the end of the Second World War, Japan released both Korea, and Taiwan. Korea was released to itself and Taiwan was returned to China. Neither had lost their cultural distinction from that of Japan during their time of occupation. Taiwan remained as Chinese as the other parts of China that had been occupied by Japan. With the success of the communists in the Chinese Civil War, Republican China was pushed further eastward until Taiwan was the only part of China still under control of the ROC (Republic of China) government. That situation is still the case today. Taiwan is and has been for nearly four centuries part of China. Occasionally, throughout history, different parts of China have had different governments. It's almost always a temporary thing, though it can extend for some years. This is the case right now. Taiwan is an independent Chinese feudatory. How long it remains such and how violently that status ends remains to be seen. I hope the eventual reunification is both peaceful and prosperous.
    1
  1414. China is clearly fighting a losing battle. Even if they do defeat this variant there will be another one around the corner. At this point the policy approach in Shanghai has become more political than scientific, all this seems true. What's missing from this conversation is that China beat COVID two years ago. They did it by looking at the disease as a serious threat to the people. They mobilized the medical community, used effective testing and tracing mechanisms and closed off the country from those who didn't take it as seriously. Because of this China saved hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of lives. China's biggest mistake in their fight against COVID was existing in a world where not everybody could, or in the most egregious cases would, take it as seriously as they did. Now we've got a variant that is ridiculously contagious but seems to be relatively harmless, but it still kills some people. Although most of those who die from this version of the disease have co-morbidities, they're still people whose deaths are still tragic. Apparently China cares about the lives of these people more than the rest of us do. China also cares about the gross irony of having those who took the criminally negligent approach to fighting (or not fighting) the virus walking away with the optics victory, and it's causing them to lose perspective on the costs and benefits of their zero-tolerance approach. If the rest of the world had fought the delta variant as effectively as China did, there wouldn't be any COVID today, or tomorrow, or for much of the past year. But because the rest of us acted like spoiled children throughout this pandemic, China now looks like a fool, and they will eventually give up, and everyone will pile on about how China failed. Tragic really.
    1
  1415. I think that's pretty obvious.
    1
  1416. China would have invaded in that case. Is that what you think should have happened?
    1
  1417.  @didierdepardieur4470  Perhaps.
    1
  1418.  @sangwoo9686  Because the United States patrolled the straits enforcing separation in 1950.
    1
  1419. Western journalists have been attacking China relentlessly since 1989. The relationship between China and Western journalists is one of mutual distrust. A casual look at BBC pieces, NYT pieces, DW pieces and other Western mainstays sees hit piece after hit piece with stories selectively chosen to damage the Chinese government and portrayed in their worst possible light with the uncritical acceptance of the claims of China's adversaries. When China does allow foreign correspondents in those correspondents spend their energies chasing Pulitzers and reinforcing Western stereotypes instead of portraying China as it actually is. China does need to do a better job of interacting with the Western press but its hard to see how such a biased self-righteous profession could be trusted by the Chinese. There needs to be a little give from both sides. China needs to ease up on the censorship but the Western press needs to paint a fairer and more accurate picture of the country and what goes on there. On a side note, the unrestrained press in the United States and the transparency that that has unleashed is a large part of the reason that compromise has become impossible in government. Anyone who reaches across the aisle is immediately exposed as a sellout to their base and they are attacked from the wings and usually replaced by a more extreme individual. There are real problems with the old back-room-deal politics that existed in less transparent times, but while sunlight may be the best disinfectant, its also the cause of cancer.
    1
  1420.  @davidzhang6230  I tend to view journalists the same way I view police. I see them as self-righteous, arrogant, judgmental and dangerous, but at the same time, you don't really want to live in a society without them.
    1
  1421.  Anti Pooh-Bear  Boy, you are really misinformed. China's never considered Japan to be their territory, ancestral or otherwise. Korea's a little more complicated, both because a Han Dynasty feudatory stretched about halfway into the peninsula at one point and also ancient Goguryeo stretched fairly deeply into Jilin and Liaoning. But if China really wanted to take part of Korea, they probably would be taking advantage of the weakness of the DPRK. China has said on numerous occasions that states should be able to choose their own form of government without interference from other states. There is no evidence whatsoever that China wants to destroy democracy in any country. China is not an evangelistic country. Where it has spread its culture in the past, it has done so through leading by example. If other countries choose to have a government system like China (which for various reasons I think is inadvisable), it is not because China is lobbying those countries to emulate it. China will most likely seek to have influence in countries around the world, and they will pursue strong influence in those countries in their neighborhood. This would be the case regardless of China's government so long as China is stable enough to concentrate on such.
    1
  1422.  @beasley1232  Japan and South Korea have genuine concerns because their trade routes to the Indian Ocean basin and on to Europe go through waters near Taiwan and Chinese reunification would put these waters very much under Chinese control which would effect the relationship and the power balance between these countries. Chinese reunification does not in-and-of-itself indicate Chinese imperial expansion. Of course, as a proud and powerful country, one cannot rule out eventual expansionary ambition on China's part, but there is no good reason to assume that China will pursue that kind of a future.
    1
  1423. I do like the theme song.
    1
  1424. The military may be doing everything it can to keep a war in the Western Pacific from occurring, but it doesn't seem like the politicians got the memo.
    1
  1425. What's destabilizing in the region is 1st: the ambiguous status of Taiwan, and 2nd: the division of the Korean peninsula. The U.S. and China see each other as aggravators of destabilization because we're each on opposite sides of these fundamentally destabilizing situations. Because both sides are sufficiently balanced these destabilizing situations are preserved.
    1
  1426. The fatal price of half-assery is nearly at ¼million lives now here in the U.S. And still, we refuse to learn.
    1
  1427.  @annannlow7056  I thought that the support within Hong Kong for the demonstrators was much weaker than reported in the west until the election results a month ago. That surprised me and I had to reassess my perception of the situation at that point. Nevertheless, I still think the protests are grossly misguided and I'm shocked by the degree to which the central government has allowed this to continue for so long without moving in and cracking down on it. I believe that if this were occurring in my own country (USA) it would have been squashed six months ago. I don't know what the central government is seriously considering, but I commend their tolerance to this point.
    1
  1428. I'm afraid actions have consequences. I hope he hasn't totally ruined his life.
    1
  1429.  Johnson Li  "it is said LA is going to get independent" Is that Los Angeles or Louisiana?
    1
  1430.  @JD-yz4kr  Uhh, No.
    1
  1431. woolly zizi, I'm thinking it may provide a trade corridor for Serbia to get its products to an Adriatic port. I don't know how much of a port there is at the end of the highway but if that turns out to be the case it might very well benefit China, Montenegro and Serbia.
    1
  1432.  @smartwulf918  I've heard it suggested that Russia's request for North Korean ammunition was made to mirror NATO's request for South Korean ammunition, and was meant as a message to NATO and to South Korea saying that "We have allies too, y'know." Russia's arms production, including artillery shells, appears to be keeping up with their needs. I do recognize that North Korea is a much less prestigious ally then, let's say, Germany or Poland, but I think they may be more reliable. It may well be that my sources are not optimal, most of the sources I'm hearing this information from are biased towards Russia. But the Western sources that still continue to promote a failing Russia narrative at this point are pretty much pure propaganda, and much less reliable, at least as far as this contest is concerned.
    1
  1433. The last thing the world needs is more frickin' entrepreneurs. This is Stanford's loss, the country is better off with you going someplace where you're appreciated. My own opinion is that admissions can be very impetuous and within the pool of qualified applicants, somewhat based on luck. If the person who happens to look at your application doesn't feel you, they'll go with someone else.
    1
  1434.  @at9871  I admit, I was being pretty one-dimensional. But so are you. China's investments in Africa run the gamut from exploitative to beneficiary and from resource-oriented to political. And while China's investments are instruments of China's interests many of those investments are substantially helpful at bringing needed services and infrastructure into countries that others are not satisfactorily investing in. While it is very important that these countries are vigilant in protecting their own interests where BRI investments are involved it is clearly in their interests to bring in foreign investment on the best terms available and in many cases, that means Chinese investment.
    1
  1435. It's not just psychological. Taiwan has to respond to any incursions in its airspace. China's air force is much larger, so the effect is to wear down Taiwan's equipment and personnel.
    1
  1436. Admitting mistakes is a good way to get removed from leadership positions, particularly in a system as fickle as a democracy.
    1
  1437. I guess that decoupling is killing that city, no?
    1
  1438.  @dingjf2219  Ooof!
    1
  1439. Why is China an existential threat to freedom? Because it's successful at bringing it's people from poverty to prosperity? China doesn't try to push their system on anybody. If people give up their freedom to emulate China, it's because their freedoms have failed them. Let China be China, and be happy to be yourself.
    1
  1440. We've never cancelled an election for a war yet.
    1
  1441.  @shai2137  The status quo covers a lot of territory. We should look to change that which is harmful (and admittedly a lot of what we have now is harmful) but we should not change things just because they exist or just because they follow a long-running tendency. We need to be more discerning than that.
    1
  1442. "…but isn't this the only way we can make sure that the west doesn't end up under the control of Russia?" You seriously think Russia has the capacity to take control of the west? Russia is doing all of this crap to stave off western encroachment into eastern Europe. In the big picture this is defensive, that's not to say that it isn't aggressive, and it's certainly not defensive from the perspective of the Ukrainians, but Russia's been watching the west take over their near-abroad like a dangerous tide for thirty years now. They may have the capacity to stem the tide through strong-arm tactics in the countries on which they border, but there is no way that Russia is going to take over Europe, much less the entire west. Of course they may blow the world up, but that's a different argument.
    1
  1443.  @tekannon7803  It's really sad that you and so many others feel that way. This doctrine of exclusivity has caused a lot of death and destruction. It's too bad we can't look at other countries, some with other systems, as partners in the advancement of humanity. Instead, we have to first destroy the infidels. It's this kind of logic that will keep us fighting and killing each other forever.
    1
  1444. If a Muslim ban "Speaks to them" then they are either racist or confused. Yes there are reasons that people voted for Trump that were not racist, misogynistic, hedonistic or xenophobic; it's for this reason that I usually give hard-core Republicans a pass. They weren't really voting for Trump—they were voting for the Republican platform and for the placement of conservative judges and Justices. But even if somebody wasn't voting for Trump because they are selfish, racist, misogynistic, or xenophobic, they had to be willing to accept that they were placing in charge of the United States and the Free World, someone who was. They were tolerant of these characteristics, which is in itself selfish, racist, misogynistic, and xenophobic, even if to a lesser degree. Now if someone claims that they are none of these things (or even not one of these things) and they voted for Trump, than they were, at the very least, willfully ignorant, or stupid, or more likely, lying. After four years of Trump we can add cruelty to that list of things a voter has to be tolerant of to vote for Trump in 2020, and most likely treason and gangster criminality as well. Ian is right though in that stating this truth is unhelpful when it comes to trying to bring the country together. And we've all seen how pathetic our efforts are when we can't all get on the same page in the face of a crises (or four). I don't think we all can come together when nobody respects anybody else, so at some point there is going to have to be an amnesty of sorts offered to those who are willing to reach out. Otherwise we, as a country, are going to end up floundering in our ineptitude going forward.
    1
  1445. Maybe Hong Kong, Ukraine for a while, Fujian, or Mad Max—Taiwan has four possible futures, and only number three is entirely within their determinability.
    1
  1446.  @oyondey2  Perhaps. It might be a very short-lived free and independent country. Either way, it would be a bombed-out nightmare.
    1
  1447.  @KnarfStein  What level is that, pray tell?
    1
  1448.  @larryholou  I don't know that we shouldn't care about Ukraine and its people simply because they are far away, but I do think that we should recognize that they are a relatively small country in Russia's backyard and we should be trying to help them get along with and prosper from their overwhelming neighbor rather than using them as a tool to get under Russia's skin.
    1
  1449.  @KnarfStein  You think Russia wants the west to be a stagnant petrostate? I haven't been to Russia. Perhaps you have and you know better. But I'm not sure Russia is as stagnant a petrostate as you think. I know Russia has been modernizing and cleaning up its cities and towns over the last twenty years. That's not to say that Russia is any kind of paradise. Standards of living are lower on average in Russia than they are in western Europe. I think this combined with a more authoritarian governance that rotates around the personality of Putin keeps most Westerners from immigrating.
    1
  1450.  @antyspi4466  I don't think Beijing fears an insurrection. The CPC has the full faith of the Chinese people and Xi Jinping is solid in the support of the party elite at this time. They're not really worried about secession either. There are secessionist movements in some regions, but they are small. China does worry about terrorism from these groups, but it's more about protecting the population than it is about genuine loss of territory. These things I understand. What I don't understand is why China makes threatening comments towards Taiwan at every election that it has to realize only strengthens the DPP. There are a couple possibilities, the first is that China's leadership is just stupid when it comes to elections. I don't really believe this, but it's an outside possibility. Another possibility is that it's all for domestic consumption. If the Chinese people believed that Xi or the party were ever to reconcile with the idea of letting Taiwan escape, it might undercut their legitimacy, and this may be a way of signalling to the Chinese people that they still are pushing a hard line. A third possibility is that China is confident that it could take Taiwan back militarily, but that they would prefer to do so after the government of Taiwan declared independence because of how that would play internationally, and by having the DPP in office, the odds of getting that justification for action is higher. I don't think China can yet be confident of a military victory, but I'm nobody in particular and I'm not privy to China's or anyone else's actual assessment of the endgame likelihood. Of these three possibilities I lean heavily towards the second, but I'm not real happy with that choice either. Maybe there is another reason I just can't think of, but I'm dead certain that China is not afraid of Taiwan or any of Taiwan's supporters within the country.
    1
  1451.  @iamtesting3824  The KMT ruled from Nanjing, and Qiongqing during the war, but I'm being picky.
    1
  1452.  @Redbaron9495  Yeah, but I think they (KMT) probably would have done even better if the Chinese rhetoric wasn't so bellicose.
    1
  1453. Yeah I was wondering about that.
    1
  1454.  @BrianFullerPDX1  Israel has a functioning democracy among its citizens. Of course many of the people it has at least some authority over are not citizens and among those people there appears to be little attempt to become such. Democracies can be just as selectively oppressive as any other system, it all depends on the will of the majority of the electorate (and its practical abilities). There are many Israelis who are uncomfortable with their government's human rights record and the policies it puts in place to maintain its status quo, just not a majority of the electorate. I would suggest that those Israelis, especially the Jewish ones, are most likely not antisemitic either. Mr. Bremer's assertion that Israel is the only democracy in the region is mostly correct. I would assert that Israel is the most democratic state in the region. Iran is probably the second most democratic state in the region, and it's a theocratic/democratic hybrid. I would also say that, where the Palestinians who do not hold Israeli citizenship are concerned, Israel is much more oppressive than Iran is on any of its people, including its Jews.
    1
  1455. Congratulations to India on their successful moon mission. Welcome to the club. As for Western racist belittlement and condescension, ask your neighbors. The Chinese have been dealing with it for decades.
    1
  1456. I think the Russians would have an immense advantage in maintaining and replacing equipment. While raw numbers are huge when it comes to war, if India didn't roll over the Russians quickly I think they would lose their ability to repel Russian air support at which point they'd be ground up.
    1
  1457. Large corporations aren't really the problem here. Large corporations pay their people more than the minimum wage and offer some benefits, especially union shops. The problem is small businesses run by petty millionaires or petty near-millionaires who are always crying a river whenever minimum wages are discussed. These are the same folks that were always trying to prematurely reopen the economy every time their was a slight reduction in the disaster rating during the pandemic. I'm not entirely without sympathy; I know it's hard to run a small business. A lot of them have thin margins and they cannot weather a crisis without substantial help. But their insular nature and their repeated failure to buy in to long term collective goals are costing a lot of them their existence in the short term and costing the country its competitiveness in the long term.
    1
  1458.  @valeriem100  Who said you weren't allowed to express your opinion?
    1
  1459.  @valeriem100  How so?
    1
  1460.  @valeriem100  You're reading stuff that just ain't there, but go ahead, it doesn't bother me any.
    1
  1461. The roots of modern science predate the European Middle Ages considerably particularly in Persia and Iraq. The European Middle Ages were a golden age of science and not to be dismissed, but they were built in knowledge and processes developed and preserved further east.
    1
  1462.  @tinafoster8665  Thanks for responding. I really enjoy what you're saying. I think it would be fun to sit down face to face over a cup of coffee with you. I'm going to make a few comments regarding some of the things you brought up, namely unions, politicians and Lyndon Johnson who is one of my heroes. I'm not trying to refute what you say, just to let you know what my experience is regarding these issues. I currently work for a union shop and it's a complicated existence. My pay and benefits are much better than they would be if I wasn't working there and I have a lot of sympathy for people trying to get along in non-union jobs. It wasn't that long ago that I was working for a contractor and if I was sick, I went to work anyway, I had no retirement and no protection if the company I was working for let me go. If you're working outside of a union, then you're familiar with all of this. So is my union corrupt? Ya better believe it. I don't know all the details because I don't spend my time worrying about it but when it comes time to elect union officers we usually have two choices—the career criminal or the nice guy. The problem with the former is that s/he is a corrupt liar that makes all of us look bad in public, and depending on the individual and the opportunity, they may be stealing from us. So vote for the nice guy, right? Well, when it comes time to negotiate a contract the management has a couple of built-in advantages. By-and-large they're smarter. Most of them are well educated and experienced negotiators. After all, they each negotiated their personal compensation package and someone that didn't negotiate hard isn't going to be on the negotiating team. Also, they have corporate legal assistance paid for by the company. Also, they're great at crying poverty and the world believes them when they say they can't afford to pay a decent wage and benefits package. They usually come to the table with a ridiculous offer that strips away everything and our union reps have to go into those negotiations under-educated and with the best lawyers that couldn't get a cozy corporate gig. Nice guys finish last, and with the entire work group bound by the contract, they take us down with them. I usually vote for the career criminal. One thing that's funny is how many union employees are anti-union. It boggles the mind. Some of them have never had to work in the outside world. Some are just ideological imbeciles. One other really nice thing about union employment is that there's no wage gender gap or racial pay discrimination. People are paid for the job they do and a little bit for seniority. It's nice not to have to deal with that crap. Of course unions are under attack in our society. There's always a politician describing how self-entitled one group or another of us are. So, why do politicians do that. As you said they're sleazy, right? Here's the rub. The reason politicians are sleazy, is because we elect sleazy politicians. The 2016 election here in the US was a beautiful case in point. The choice was between a career public servant who spent her life fighting for women's issues, representing the people of New York and trying to push our democratic ideology on the rest of the world—not perfect, but not bad, and a career tabloid star known for extravagance, abuse, and mismanagement. The former was honest with the electorate about the present and the future and the opportunities and limits of government ability to affect those. The latter promised to bring obsolete jobs back from nonexistent factories in Mexico and China, promised to keep out Muslims and Mexicans and accused his opponent of criminal activity. The problem isn't that our politicians are sleazy, it's that we're enamored with—and we vote for—sleazy politicians. Lastly regarding Lyndon Johnson: I know that the Vietnam War was a catastrophe for America and it couldn't have been good for the Vietnamese. I know some of our activities in that conflict were reprehensible including our participation. I've no intention to defend any of that directly. Sometimes people find themselves in circumstances beyond themselves. Lyndon Johnson was a powerful man. He was crude, sexist, possibly racist, definitely abusive on so many levels, but he was also a very loving man. He loved his friends, his family, and the people of America, and he found ways to take care of us even against our will. The tapes from the Johnson administration have been released and they show a man who was torn to pieces by the carnage of the Vietnam War not just because of what it was doing to his reputation, but because of what it was doing to the country and to the young men and women who were fighting there. So, as the most powerful man in the world why didn't he just stop it? Because as powerful as he was, the Cold War was more powerful, and American politics being what they were, not only could he not avoid getting into the war in the first place, but also there was no way out of it once inside. That doesn't really address the power imbalance or the general disregard for Vietnam and its neighbors. That's really more of an America thing than a Johnson thing. Everything was viewed through the lens of holding back the Soviet tide in America and no other country was treated as anything but a pawn in the new great game. America still has a lot of residual baggage from those days and our sense of identity since the end of the Cold War, though not nearly so traumatized as Russia's, is still sometimes confusing. As I said at the beginning, I'm not trying to refute what you were saying. I hope my own take on these things is something you find, if not useful, at least entertaining. I look forward to your response.
    1
  1463.  @tinafoster8665  Oh he definitely wanted the job. He just didn't want the war.
    1
  1464.  @zouzhihui8282  What do you call someone who speaks two languages?…, bilingual. What do you call someone who speaks three or more languages?…, multilingual. What do you call someone who speaks one language?…, American. Mr. or Ms. Zou, I dearly wish I could read your response but alas, I am what I am and that, is Mandarin illiterate. My apologies.
    1
  1465.  @tinafoster8665  There is nothing stupid about what I said. The bridge was built to specs and it stood for decades. The bridge collapsed because it was not properly inspected and maintained. Often, it's a lot easier securing funding for a building project then it is to secure funding for maintaining what's already been built. This is especially the case when the control of the budget goes back and forth between one party who wants to spend tax money on big projects and another party who wants to slash spending to fund tax cuts.
    1
  1466.  @tinafoster8665  I'm sorry to keep disagreeing, but well-built stuff does fall apart if it is not maintained. This is especially true of something like concrete in an environment like Minnesota. You do have a legitimate complaint about me asserting that the bridge was built properly without me actually knowing if that was the case. It was built in 1967 and it collapsed in 2007. That suggests to me that it was built properly, or at least substantially enough that it held for four decades.
    1
  1467.  @tinafoster8665  I'm sorry if I said something disrespectful. That wasn't my intention. I wasn't living in Minnesota when the bridge collapsed, but I lived there in when I was in High School and for a few years after I got out of the army. I used to cross it every day on my way to work.
    1
  1468.  @AlvinCwk  Cantonese is the local dialect for all of Guangdong. Speaking Cantonese in no way suggests that one is not Chinese. In fact it strongly suggests that one is Chinese.
    1
  1469. @itz uhbuv That's a reasonable criticism. Who might want to be ruled by such a government? Someone who currently lives in a lawless environment.
    1
  1470.  @edisoncheng45  Mandarin and Cantonese can both be written in either traditional or modern simplified Chinese script.
    1
  1471. @itz uhbuv I didn't say it was. I just answered your question.
    1
  1472.  @edisoncheng45  There is no written text for either Cantonese or Mandarin. There are only traditional Chinese and simplified Chinese. And you are absolutely correct about local variations being neither common enough nor critical enough to define the textual language. Thank you for trying to educate me though. I'm sure you meant well.
    1
  1473.  @tusk3260  While an alliance between Canada and Russia would be nothing to scoff at, I think you greatly underestimate the American military, especially considering that the northern front would be easily supplied and the vast majority of the Canadian population lives within a hundred miles of the U.S. border. Ground occupation would swift and overwhelming. Russian support would have to come either across the Arctic ocean or through eastern Siberia. It's hard to supply through the Arctic in the winter and hard to supply through the tundra in the summer. Canada might get some initial penetration because the bulk of American infantry and armored cavalry divisions are in southern states, but American air superiority in North America would be total unless the Russian air force completely relocated to northern Canada in which case it would be merely nearly total. An all out push might make it into Pennsylvania but I'd be shocked if it got all the way to Washington.
    1
  1474.  @tusk3260  I fully respect the geography of Canada—rugged mountains in the west, lakes and prairies in the central regions, permafrost in the continental north, archipelagos in the northeast that rival Indonesia in their complexity. I think the difficulties of taking and holding territory in greater Canada would be the same limitations to supplying it whether it was supplying American forces from the south or supplying Canadian/Russian forces from the north. In most of Canada's population centers though, the logistics would favor the Americans over Russian support. There's not enough of a supply line from the north coast, and certainly not year round. And while we can debate your disdain for American military hardware I don't think you can credibly argue that within a few days Canadian forces encroaching into American territory wouldn't be engulfed in its sheer quantity. I think the biggest advantage such an invasion force would have is the initial reluctance of the U.S. Army to charge tanks through private property. Once we got over that hang up I think the Canadians would be toast.
    1
  1475. The advantage an island has over a carrier is that if an airfield is bombed it can be repaired in a few days if the construction equipment is present. Of course, it could be bombed again. If a carrier is bombed successfully it probably won't be salvaged during the current conflict. Of course theoretically if a carrier survives a bombing it could go somewhere else, maybe somewhere out of reach or at least somewhere where defenses are stronger.
    1
  1476.  @retired-s5h  If Europe and the United States didn't bring NATO to the borders of Russia itself none of this would be happening right now. But now that Russia has invaded its weaker neighbor, it's very hard to put a pretty face on that level of aggression. Perhaps NATO should throw down in Ukraine and let the winner take all. That, of course, would leave Ukraine a smoking ruin regardless of who triumphed in the end. It would, however, answer the question, at least for a while, of whether Russia gets to be a great power and heavily influence their near abroad or whether Russia has to be satisfied with middling power status as all of Europe that isn't Russia falls entirely into the domain of the West.
    1
  1477. I think it's the other way around. Blinken is much more of a hawk than Biden.
    1
  1478. "China split in 1949" like Germany split in 1945.
    1
  1479.  @Jimmy2toes4u  I think you've bought in to some pretty vicious anti-Chinese ideological propaganda. China's behavior towards its minorities overall has been quite supportive and anecdotal allegations of abuse, while potentially plausible at an individual level, are certainly unproven, and I would say extremely unlikely, on a systemic scale.
    1
  1480.  @Jimmy2toes4u  Countries considering foreign investment, whether from China, Japan, or the west, have an obligation to their people to vet the offer thoroughly. I wouldn't refer to that level of inspection as push-back, but rather as due-diligence. Nor would I consider that careful scrutiny of investment options as suspicious of China. Investment recipients know full well that Chinese investments are designed to benefit China first and the recipient second—such is the nature of investment. Criticism of China, however, seems to be coming predominately from the anglosphere, from India, and to a lesser extent from western Europe. While this is an important part of the world, it is not the totality of the world. The rest of the world, regardless of whether or not they are participating in the Chinese foreign investment regime, are far less critical of China, in part because they don't trust the western anti-Chinese narrative, and for good reason.
    1
  1481. No human being should be treated like a class equal to an animal.
    1
  1482.  @happyjohn354  Hong Kong was always part of China. It was just temporarily administered by the British and the Japanese. From the 1984 Joint Declaration: "The [HKSAR] will be directly under the authority of the Central People's Government of the [PRC and] will enjoy a high degree of autonomy, except in foreign and defense affairs." (wikipedia) It does spell out the preservation of the existent social and economic systems of the time, but does not promise democracy or universal suffrage. There is no recognition of independence. And while other aspects of the Joint Declaration have been tested, some would say eroded, by the central government, dismissal of the Joint Declaration would only allow for a more direct rule by the central government.
    1
  1483. Actually I'm really curious about the "protracted war" scenario. I think an industry vs. industry analysis would be fascinating. Which country could mobilize its factories faster and pump out the most hardware over the course of a couple of years? China has more factories and more workers than the U.S., but it also would have a harder time reaching the American industrial core than the U.S. would have reaching China's. It might very well depend on China's ability to protect those factories. Of course the U.S. has more factories currently churning out military equipment, so less of its manufacturing base would have to be re-purposed. The U.S. also currently has a technology edge that might or might not endure over the course of a long conflict.
    1
  1484.  @nevadataylor  Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Without corporations you're not going to have the kind of large scale firms necessary to provide living wages to workers. Corporations are not evil, they just need to be regulated sufficiently to make sure that their pursuit of profit doesn't undermine the general welfare.
    1
  1485.  @ramirorodriguez9671  Everybody does. It's important though that we understand both the importance of corporate firms, and the importance of keeping them in check.
    1
  1486.  @ramirorodriguez9671  I agree. One thing that we need to consider going forward though is that there are economic behemoths in the international marketplace that have government support and in many cases government subsidization. If we want American companies to compete internationally than it's important that they can harness the economies of scale that European, Asian and Chinese rivals take advantage of. I'm a huge advocate of strong government regulation but I'm disconcerted by the ideology of anti-bigness that seems to be infecting some segments of the populace.
    1
  1487.  @eaglesclaws8  Too true.
    1
  1488.  @nevadataylor  Capitalism in its purest sense is by definition a liberal free market and I agree that it is destined for failure (or at least cyclical brutality) because it naturally trends towards wealth inequality and exploitation of the masses. Because of this capitalism, in order to survive over time, has to be managed through an institution of authority, and that is government. I looked at your video on Jacque Fresco's economic model. It's highly Utopian, and that's good. We should be thinking about how to optimize human comfort and content not in terms of average comfort but in terms of both total comfort and equally accessed and distributed comfort. The issues I have with the video are mostly in the latter half of the presentation. I disagree with the "Proximity Strategy" laid out in the video. The energy and material conservation of eliminating trade I suspect would be countered by the inefficiency of creating micro-factories everywhere that could not take advantage of scale efficiency as well as the costs of creating and maintaining artificial environments so that you could grow that coffee in Siberia. The other issue I have is with the "Strategic Access" subsection. Elimination of ownership means loss of any kind of control. I have to imagine that there would be conflicts as people failed to return borrowed objects in a timely manner or insisted on greater shares of some resources than that of their colleagues. These are the things that really took a toll on attempts at communism—y'know, human nature. In order to instill in people the discipline necessary to behave in such a way that they put the collective needs ahead of their own desires and that of their families you'd have to have either a pretty intense reprogramming of human norms or a pretty unyielding enforcement corps. Either of these would require a strong governing authority. You may argue that that authority should rest in the hands of a complex computer program; I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that myself though and I suspect that neither are the majority of other people. Aside from the isolating aspects of it and the likely costs of changing human behavior in the short term I think the Venus Project has merit. It certainly makes for a worthwhile thought experiment. I think that over time a technocratic approach to economics will be shown to be better than the lassaiz-fair approach that dominates much of the world today, but at least for the foreseeable future we're going to have to cultivate a human governance that takes into account the needs of people both to have individual personal value within society (and the hope of increasing that value) as well as control of their reasonable quantity of possessions.
    1
  1489. You may very well have a point about the primaries, then again you may be over-selling it. After all, it was a Democratic primary and the nominee should therefore be chosen by Democrats, the overwhelming majority of whom voted for Hillary in the primaries and would have regardless. Nevertheless, when the general election came you had a choice between making a vengeance vote that did not help you in any way but torpedoed the country and the rest of the world, or, acting like a responsible grownup and choosing the best remaining path available to you and the rest of the world. Moderate Democrats have swallowed hard in the past and supported candidates running as progressives in 1960, 1976, 1992 and 2008. I don't know which path you took, and if you chose the former than you'll likely never admit responsibility to the damage that folks of that mindset caused. As for the culpability of "corporatist" Democrats. I don't like the degree to which the party is affected by money either. But unless we get some court precedents overturned, that's the river that we all have to swim in. Enough of the electorate is made up of political butterflies who have little to no understanding of governance and are extremely susceptible to soundbite messaging that so long as money is viewed as free speech all serious politicians are going to be forced to chase down money unless they're outrageous enough to get free media attention. The failure to put a Democrat in office this last election just locked the Supreme Court hard right for probably two decades. Maybe Bernie should have won the primaries and been that option, but the last time that option was available, Hillary Clinton was the only choice. I do think that progressives should fight hard to get their nominees elected in the primaries. I think moderates should do so as well. But willingness to scuttle a general election in order to express outrage over a primary is totally unconscionable considering the stakes. The Republican platform is pretty evil during normal times. To give someone like Trump the ability to execute it… let's just not do that again, okay. I mean, we only have one country.
    1
  1490. So is the problem really that China's values are so different from the West or is it that the West's values are different from China's? Isn't it important that we attempt to see things from each other's side or is it absolutely necessary that China does all the movement towards Western values? I'm glad China isn't insisting that the West change it's values to match theirs. Perhaps the West could be a little less ideologically tyrannical.
    1
  1491. And in an independent East Turkistan ruled by Uyghur nationalists they might have a rough time.
    1
  1492. That smartness is likely to get them killed. If the CCP were thugs Hong Kong would be occupied right now. If you want to see their reluctance to squash Hong Kong as evidence that they are a paper tiger, that's on you. They may not be the world's most ferocious tiger, but I don't feel any paper.
    1
  1493. They may or may not be right, but they're right enough. Fortunately for China, what their haters believe ultimately won't matter. They're doing what they can for themselves and for the rest of the world. Some will accept it, others won't. Time marches on.
    1
  1494. The French are the most likely within the EU to find common cause with the UK going forward as the country with the greatest economic interdependence that currently doesn't have a enigmatic territorial relationship. The fact that the French President's words are more frank and aggressive than those of the German representatives speaks to the diplomatic competence of those Germans interviewed.
    1
  1495. I'm concerned about the welfare of the people of Iran and I'm very nervous about movements that start in the countryside. I think they are more likely to succeed in toppling a government. I also think they're more likely to replace it with something worse. I hope this settles down before more people get hurt and I hope that what the government learns from these protests actually leads to better policies.
    1
  1496. I think CNA has been as fair as any news media outlet regarding the protests. It's really hard for any institution not to come down on one side or another.
    1
  1497.  @timtim6887  I think everyone is biased to some degree including me (if I'm being honest I have to admit that my biases are pretty strong). My understanding is that CNA is owned by Singapore, not China. I'm not sure what their natural bias would necessarily be.
    1
  1498. In all fairness, the odds of a Democrat reversing a denuclearization of the Korean peninsula agreement simply because Trump signed it is exceedingly rare. Admittedly, a Republican reversing a denuclearization of Iran agreement simply because Obama's name was on it was unlikely too. We just happened to elect the one guy dumb and dangerous enough to do it.
    1
  1499. Why do you want to blame China? China didn't do anything to anyone. The mistakes made in China were made because the disease was largely a mystery at the time those errors were made. The one exception to that was the Chinese foreign minister who pushed the conspiracy theory that the virus might have been brought in by Americans. That was unconscionable but it has been debunked and cracked down on within China itself.
    1
  1500.  @11111110  There haven't been protests in the United States this violent since the Rodney King riots and those didn't come close to four months in longevity.
    1
  1501.  @Woccupyl  Telling.
    1
  1502. Don't worry too much about extending information that was later refuted. Trump is Captain Chaos. No one can be sure which things he says will turn out to match what actually happens.
    1
  1503. While the future may be Asian, most of that will be China.
    1
  1504.  @swakal8868  I'm not going to sit here and say India hasn't influenced Asia. India has influenced Asia and the rest of the world a great deal. But for the coming century China will be the most influential player in Asia by a lot, and probably the most influential player in the world—definitely in the top two.
    1
  1505.  @TheWanderer8490  Usually POWs aren't released before the war ends, but those who sought asylum at the end of hostilities might be given that option.
    1
  1506.  @MultiBrad777  One day on the moon lasts one month on the Earth.
    1
  1507.  @ewoudalliet1734  There are two directions on the axis of leadership. On one extreme you have the kind of leaders that don't give a rip about the people their responsible for and are only there to satisfy themselves and maximize their profits while in office. On the other end are leaders who care deeply about the people and who try very hard to promote their welfare. In most of these cases they have plans, and they believe that their plans can only help the people if they have the power to carry them out. I think you see the CCP as the former and I see them as the latter, and I don't think either of us are going to change the other's mind.
    1
  1508. The greatest American hardware advantage is in the quantity of combat aircraft.
    1
  1509.  @geeetube1  Seriously? China is the second most powerful country in the world and her influence is steadily increasing. China is trying very hard to not rain on these protesters like a ton of bricks because they don't want to look like monsters. But regardless of whether or not China succumbs to its reflex to put down this insurrection its position in the world will not change, only its image.
    1
  1510. I think that if the government fit the statement "…nor is shy of using lethal force against its own people." It would have used lethal force by now. I think both the Hong Kong government and the PRC government are quite shy of using lethal force against their residents.
    1
  1511. China, Iran, it's still impressive though.
    1
  1512.  @sparxumlilo4003  Yes and no, but in fairness, Russia's not throwing all of its game in there either.
    1
  1513. "Amazon Warehouses on the Moon." I think I saw that movie.
    1
  1514. Why is that?
    1
  1515.  @SirBaited  That's not communism's fault.
    1
  1516. What's so extraordinary about the most competent leader in the Western world flying to negotiate directly with the most competent leader in the rest of the world?
    1
  1517.  @buildmotosykletist1987  Admittedly, the British are pretty desperate right now. They're not going to come close to replacing the Chinese market however. And really, what have they got to offer you in exchange?
    1
  1518. @C Tang Oh, so that's his plan.
    1
  1519.  @d.n.8919  The real reason is that foreign adoption has been a conduit for human trafficking that encouraged kidnappings and unscrupulous pressure on poor families with children in need of medical attention. Countries that can take care of their children don't permit them to be adopted overseas. China is now in a position to take care of their children.
    1
  1520.  Gen Info  I think I misunderstood your original statement. I thought you were referring to all the people of Hong Kong. But on second reading I think you were only referring to the demonstrators. Even so, while the demonstrators partaking in violence, vandalism and assault are engaged in what is and should be considered criminal behavior, they're still not vermin. Those that are merely adding their enthusiasm to what is destined to be a failed movement, while dangerous in their naivety to themselves and others, are nonetheless completely human. It's never good to dehumanize people, even those you find contemptible. Those who make mistakes, even grave ones, in their youths can be rehabilitated, but that does require a certain degree of respect. I'm very much saddened by what's going on in Hong Kong, and not just because it's violent and unseemly. The "One-Party, Two-Systems" arrangement was supposed to display an alternative for Taiwan to reunite without a military invasion. I think these protesters have just destroyed that option. Because of this, at least in part, the reunification is likely to be bloody with terrible casualties on both sides. Hong Kong can be suppressed in a few days at most, probably with casualties in the low thousands. That's still terrible, but the impending conflict thirty years from now….
    1
  1521. As an American, that statement is particularly ominous.
    1
  1522. Do you have any evidence of officials falling out of favor and being executed because of it? I've not heard of such in Russia under Putin. I will acknowledge that his chief rival was poisoned, presumably by someone who did so either at Putin's request or independently in an attempt to curry favor with him, but Novolny was an active adversary, not a mistaken advisor. Putin's inner circle may very well hide the truth from him because they don't want to lose their cushy positions, but I haven't seen any evidence whatsoever that they are at risk of dying prematurely merely for telling Putin what he might not want to hear.
    1
  1523.  Penny Neiman  You haven't refuted anything I mentioned. If there are incidences of Putin executing advisors who deliver unwanted information to him, I haven't seen it. If you have, please point me to it. Russia said they would not attack Ukraine if they gave up their missiles. NATO said they would not expand past Germany, Ukraine said they would abide by Minsk II. Everybody lies when it suits them. That doesn't really excuse it, but it does put it in perspective. I'm not taking Russia's side here, but saying Putin shoots his messengers is an example of gross misrepresentation if you don't have evidence to back it up. Now, if you are a Ukrainian defending Ukraine, it's your duty to smear your enemy. And if that's the case, I salute you. If you are not at war with Russia, than you can still slander them as a symbol of your support for the Ukrainian side, and that's perfectly okay. If you really believe it though, then either you're brainwashed, or you have access to information that regular people like me do not.
    1
  1524.  @ubroc  Anyone who thinks Putin is crazy hasn't really observed him closely. Putin is cold, calculated, Machiavellian, and gutsy. He's shepherded Russia back from the brink of irrelevance in the face of overwhelming western headwinds, not through insanity, but through willingness to take necessary risks. It's quite possible that at some point he'll take one risk too many. It's possible that he's already done that in Ukraine, but it had to be done, otherwise Russia would end up torn to pieces the way the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia were, at western instigation. One of the cornerstones of western propaganda is to declare unapproved of leaders crazy. It's been used against the leadership in North Korea, Venezuela, Libya, Syria, now Russia. I've even seen accusations of craziness levelled against Xi Jinping of China, probably the most competent world leader currently holding office. You can't effectively run a country if you are crazy, and Putin is very effective at running Russia. If, on the other hand, you want to say that Putin is evil, I think that's a much more defensible position. He certainly seems willing to break a few eggs.
    1
  1525.  @robertbricker  What you're saying here jives much more with my limited understanding of Putin's behavior regarding his friends and enemies. The comment I was responding to from you was, "When you have an authoritarian government like Mr. Putin's, one doesn't go off quietly in to retirement if things don't go well. One is given a blindfold and asked to stand in front of a wall." which I didn't think matched my perception of Putin's actions up to this point. I do agree that Putin appears to be willing to use old-fashioned methods for sidelining his adversaries. I don't know of any instances where he has threatened the survival of advisors who offer harsh advice, or poor advice that leads to unfortunate (from his perspective) outcomes though. I did want to thank you for bringing up details to support your general description of Putin's political history, it's probably more work than I would have done, me being lazy and all.
    1
  1526.  @ubroc  I've seen western descriptions of the performance of the Russian army. These are the same describers that told us that the Syrian army was doomed and on the verge of collapse several times during that conflict. I don't trust these descriptions entirely. That doesn't mean that I believe the excuse ridden narrative of Russia's boosters either. I'm going to wait to pass judgment until the reality becomes obvious under the overlying fantasies of both sides.
    1
  1527.  @ubroc  They may not attack, but they damn sure encroach. I don't blame the Russians one bit for being nervous. They have been invaded three times from the west during the modern era, and each time it was devastating to the Russian people. They just don't believe we're as benevolent as we think we are.
    1
  1528. I'll believe it when I see it.
    1
  1529.  @panzerofthelake506  Those warships are a long way from Tibet.
    1
  1530.  @panzerofthelake506  I'm not sure they could get close enough. Besides, firebombing the capital of a nuclear-armed rival is probably even too adventurous for the American military.
    1
  1531.  @DaniloCassuti  Why would you have to have a free market system to belong to the World Trade Organization? The global market is pretty loose. If you have something to offer for trade or you have money to buy goods, why shouldn't you trade? At least as a WTO member there's a regulatory structure.
    1
  1532.  glitchy box  What an absolutely stupid suggestion.
    1
  1533.  glitchy box  "well we are not some Tibet that china can occupy" — India's an extremely large country with thick forests largely protected from a northern invasion by the Himalayas. I'm sure the people of India would defend the country vigorously and, as you suggested, the nuclear deterrent is very real. I don't know the extant of India's nuclear arsenal. I'm pretty sure China's is heavily undercounted, but of course it doesn't take much. I do think China is in a better position militarily than India and I think over time they probably will attempt to redefine their borders. I certainly don't think they will try to invade the heartland of India, but the periphery is vulnerable. If India chooses to defend its frontier with nuclear weapons, I would understand that sentiment, but unless India is willing to destroy all of China and accept the fact that China would destroy India as well, and probably to a much more thorough degree, I don't think India is likely to make that decision. "by the way where are you from" — Originally I'm from Seattle, but I live in Portland right now.
    1
  1534. Most exiles support sanctions on their home country. If they were happy with their home country, they wouldn't be living in exile.
    1
  1535. Iris Chang's "Thread of the Silkworm" describes the life of Qian Xuesen, the father of Chinese rocketry, trained at Cal Tech, employed at JPL, worked on the Manhattan Project, and deported to China during McCarthy's red scare. It's a great story
    1
  1536.  @traderwilliam2  …or less affluent.
    1
  1537.  @noirto2  As a reluctant passenger on this bus I like your analogy.
    1
  1538. They probably call themselves pro-democracy protesters because of the support it elicits from the West. They may even believe it.
    1
  1539.  @twilight6460  Singapore is not a democracy, and South Korea wasn't one when it pulled itself out of the third world.
    1
  1540.  @Yooncelebtarot  Do we know what prompted them to draw on him in the first place?
    1
  1541.  @tomsriver2838  That's true of any party.
    1
  1542.  @johnnychang4233  My money's on the elephant.
    1
  1543. If the rocket had blown up after lift-off, that would be a big blow to the Chinese Space Agency. If they missed a launch window that won't appear for another ten years, then that would be a big blow to the Chinese Space Agency. If they called off a launch because they discovered a technical problem before the launch occurred, that's a small blow to the Chinese Space Agency. Let's try to keep things in perspective.
    1
  1544. Except that there aren't just two parties involved. Once it's been determined to take the pregnancy to term there are at least three involved parties (man, woman & child) and arguably four (man, woman, child & state). So a man's rights have to be weighed not just against the woman's but against the child's and state's as well.
    1
  1545. First of all, the state may not be "a human" but it is human and it's a crucial responsible party for much of the care and support of any child. Unless the pregnancy is terminated a child will be born and the absence of one of that child's parents will harm that child. It's possible that in some circumstances the presence of a given parent may be more harmful than the absence, but in the majority of cases that is not true. I understand the frustration that a prospective mother can end the situation without coercion while the prospective father cannot and the inherent unfairness of that circumstance. But both the unfairness of eliminating one of the key caregivers of a child for their entire life and the unfairness of coercive termination of pregnancy are greater instances. There's no way to make it fair so long as the pregnancy takes place exclusively in the body of a woman (nor would it be fair if the pregnancy took place exclusively in the body of a man). Once the baby is out of the woman's body it has the right to be cared for and supported by its parents and neither parent should be able to opt out of that responsibility.
    1
  1546. I know that this is a distinction without a difference but it's not the mother who's entitled to support, it's the child who's entitled to it, and the child never had any opportunity to decide whether or not the pregnancy from which they came was to be terminated or not. Personally I don't think a sperm bank father should be able to get out of that responsibility either. Nor do I think any parent should be allowed to hide their identity from a child who wants to know who his parents are, at least not once they reach adulthood. Of course these are personal opinions on which current law disagrees with me. I'm a bit shocked by how many people think that the parents' rights to abandon a child outweigh the child's rights to care and support. I didn't think people really thought that way. I'm sure the touchiness of abortion in general and the sexual tension regarding personal decisions that the other, and in most of these cases estranged, partner can make with long term consequences for the one not making the decision also feels oppressive and brings up a lot of defensiveness. And while I think it's unfortunate that a man cannot terminate an unwanted pregnancy the way a woman can without invading her body it's just a reality we need to accept until pregnancies can take place in a more neutral environment.
    1
  1547. I'm usually inclined to argue that we should try a little harder to understand Russia's viewpoint and try to hammer out our differences diplomatically and find common goals that we can work towards together. However, if this turns out to be true, this is the kind of thing that I would be willing to fight over. If Russia is posting bounty on our soldiers then they are engaging in an act of war, and the price for that kind of belligerence should be high.
    1
  1548.  John Adams  Nor do I, but you can't let this behavior go unchecked.
    1
  1549.  @MrJuanDover  Yes, I assumed the same thing. There was just a markedly different tone between Putin's voice and the translators, and I was wondering if that was intentional.
    1
  1550.  @jungbolosse3034  I'm pretty sure you're poking fun at me, which, by the way, I'm totally okay with. I'm not sure what I think, which is why I said "I wonder". It comes off to me as caricaturization, but I am not sure that that was the intention.
    1
  1551.  @free_shortvideo  Yeah, I've seen a lot of other commenters saying similar things. I'm in no position myself to judge its accuracy. I'm just pointing out aspects of its delivery.
    1
  1552.  @carlosviajes  They did a number on us as well. A lot has happened since the 70s.
    1
  1553.  @carlosviajes  Vietnam would rather do business with both economies. You are right in your suggestion that Vietnam is not friendlier to China than it is to the U.S. though.
    1
  1554.  @carlosviajes  China is the closest large market and it makes sense for light manufacturing to move to less developed countries. Of the less developed countries available Vietnam has one of the most reliable workforces. Vietnam has historical anxiety regarding China and it has issues regarding water resources and maritime territorial claims, but I don't think they would be full-throated cheerleaders for the U.S. in the above scenario either. The countries on China's perimeter aren't likely to want a destroyed China next door (India and Taiwan excepted).
    1
  1555.  @carlosviajes  Sometimes. That is the dynamic when a larger powerful country has a hegemonic presence in the region (see USA/Mexico). Of course Vietnam wants to keep its independence which is not really under threat right now. But Vietnam also wants to benefit from its proximity to China, which it is doing to the tune of $42 billion worth of goods exported, and 5.8 million visitors last year. The destruction of China in the best scenario would greatly damage the Vietnamese economy and the United States would not come close to picking up the slack. And of course the worst case for Vietnam would be to be seen as China's enemy after China successfully drove back the invasion. If China came out relatively stronger, which is a real possibility, then assisting the United States might prove to have been a terrible mistake.
    1
  1556. Taiwan's air space is part of China's air space.
    1
  1557.  @SerinaDeMadrigal  Right, right, right, right, and never dismiss Russia no matter how weak they look on paper.
    1
  1558.  @johnnyjohn5440  How far in the past are you talking about. The first fifty years of the People's Republic were every bit as authoritarian as today's China, and that was only thirty-five years ago.
    1
  1559. The protesters pretty much undid the deal when they started calling for independence and the western institutions that supported and funded these protests were complicit. Everybody is upset with those on the other side. That's to be expected.
    1
  1560.  @HomeCookOtaku2003  Thank God you're not a U.S. citizen.
    1
  1561.  @kaybee65  I think Russia's strategy would be to try to get along with Europe and make sure that China remained strong enough to wear the United States down but withhold assistance if it looks like China will come out too strong. If their two greatest rivals could beat each other into total ineffectiveness, Russia will finally feel they security that they've never really known.
    1
  1562.  @pgabrieli  Why? The Uighurs in China aren't a problem. It's their clueless advocates outside of China that don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.
    1
  1563.  @lilBabyBornInCalifornia  I've been to China on a couple of occasions, though not as a reporter. The worst that I've seen happening to reporters in China is that their visa might not be extended and they may have to go home. This usually occurs after a reporter has accumulated a catalog of hit pieces where information is manipulated into anti-Chinese propaganda. China is actually remarkably tolerant of unethical foreign correspondence manufacturing muck in search of a Pulitzer. My sense is that Russia is less accommodating to reporters who are either out to undermine the government or who just inadvertently shine too much light on the dark places that the powerful operate in clandestine comforts, and North Korea is downright dangerous for anyone asking any kinds of questions. Your implied criticism in these two countries, as far as I know, is justified. Mexico's situation in certain states is also quite dangerous, but for completely different reasons. There, the enemy of the press is not so much the government as it is the lawlessness within the drug-trafficking regions and the powerful outlaws that operate their narco-fiefdoms unchecked.
    1
  1564. You think they'll listen just because they're family?
    1
  1565. It is a pretty standard form of crowd control. It doesn't look good, but it avoids a lot of serious injury.
    1
  1566.  @birdpee8699  Yeah, it's usually not used indoors unless someone has barricaded themselves in. That probably wasn't a very good call by the on-site commander. Nonetheless, the damages caused by tear gas are almost always temporary and minor.
    1
  1567. No they shouldn't, and the Chinese leadership knows they shouldn't.
    1
  1568. Those pilots won't be on a ship—they'll be in an underground location on the mainland. It's also likely that many of those drones will be AI drones, just in case all the satellites are taken out.
    1
  1569. And he did it entertaining troops in a war zone. How many of his detractors have done half as much for their country?
    1
  1570. So vegetables at farmers' markets are those not quite good enough for grocery stores? Oh boy…
    1
  1571.  @AshishSingh-ut6fk  So what is the value of prestige? I don't think it's negligible.
    1
  1572.  @LarryWater  A train route to Lhasa was too expensive, but the Chinese built one anyway. Turning a profit is a fine motivation. But having a national vision is a better one.
    1
  1573.  @jayt3972  "On the other hand space travel probably will not yield much benefit for the 'investor'." I think that's yet to be determined. I think both projects are worthwhile.
    1
  1574. Only 105 weeks left.
    1
  1575. I think his last boss was a U.S, Navy officer.
    1
  1576. I'm kinda with Danté on the Greek heroes thing. Troy was awesome, especially Hector, and the things the Argives did in order to destroy it not to mention the absolutely pathetic reasoning for doing it in the first place, were just messed up.
    1
  1577. Satellite resources will probably be the first things destroyed once it is determined that the United States is participating. Bombers may have the range to come from the states, but fighter escorts are going to require refueling, which they might get. An amphibious assault force will certainly have vulnerabilities, but it only takes a few hours to get across those straits by ship so the bulk of the troops will probably float across before a proper open water defense can be mounted. China also has amphibious aircraft that can bring troops and supplies not just to airfields but to beaches and lakes as well if they can control the skies.
    1
  1578.  @badguy1481  I don't share your confidence in the protection of satellites. I don't think China is ready to take Taiwan now, but I think they are close, at least militarily. I think the numbers of ships and boats that China can dedicate to the supply route is sufficient to supply landed troops. I think a lot of them would perish initially, but in the long run I think the supply line would be secure. China's proximity to the battle would prove highly advantageous when it came to aerial support and missile defense. If the US managed to land large numbers of troops on the island and then secured its supply lines on the eastern side then it may become a war of attrition, but that's a challenge as well. I'm not sure how much resistance vs. support China would have from the local population. Most Taiwan residents are Chinese after all. I think many of the more level-headed residents might very well decide to throw their lot in with the PLA.
    1
  1579. It doesn't have to happen. Taiwan could reach out to negotiate a peaceful reincorporation. Absent that, it's going to happen at some point.
    1
  1580. Good way to looses a boat.
    1
  1581. In order for it to be slander it has to be inaccurate, and while there are certainly examples of young people who are capable of considering the long game, as a group I think his point is warranted.
    1
  1582. I think we're going to find out exactly how much China needs the United States, because China is not going to sacrifice sovereignty over territory in order to continue doing business with the United States. A lot of people are arguing that China is dependent on U.S. trade and China is trying to preserve what trade it can without looking like they are being manhandled, but China's domestic market is substantial and they are pursuing trade with other countries and having some success with that. I think the leaders of China have calculated the greater costs between angering the West and allowing destabilizing influences inside their own house and they are acting accordingly. China will suffer some from their decisions, but I think in the long run they'll be better off for putting these issues to bed in the short term.
    1
  1583. I don't agree with a two-state solution either for two reasons. The first is that what would go to make up a state of Palestine (Gaza and the West Bank) is not a sustainable state. It's a land-locked region separated from its only port by Israel. The second point is that the land currently identified by the state of Israel, as well as Gaza and the West Bank, belongs to both people. It needs to include both people in all areas. What we need is a single state of Israel that covers all the land of Palestine populated by all the Jewish, Muslim, and Christian Palestinians, all with first-class Israeli citizenship. And we need this state of Israel to try to get along with the major states in the region to include Iran, Turkey, and Egypt at the very least.
    1
  1584.  @historydiscover  The land is Palestine. This was the case in Ottoman times. There is only one functional state in Palestine. That state is Israel. The West Bank and Gaza would not make a functional state in my opinion. Another state within Palestine would have to be contiguous with all its parts, and it couldn't be land-locked. You can call anything whatever you want, but the people that live in Palestine today, whether in Israel proper or in the West Bank and Gaza, need to be allowed to live anywhere in Palestine so long as it's not facilitated through destruction or forced relocation.
    1
  1585.  @ittastelikekool-aid7483  Do you have any proof for that assertion?
    1
  1586. Demand boosts the economy. Production should increase until either demand is met or practical limits of production are achieved. If spending outstrips the increasing rate of production then prices will be inflated. The poorer the people you give money to, the more efficiently the money increases demand because those are the folks most likely to spend it immediately. Of course if you restrict payment to the poor than it creates a negative incentive for recipients to find other ways to improve household income. Also, universal distribution increases the diversity of producers that benefit from the program at the first point of sale.
    1
  1587.  @all2jesus  If money is distributed to the people than demand is not artificial, it's real, though diminishing if the value of that money decreases. If too much money is injected into the economy too quickly than the price of production will go up because of the discrepancy in the value of money collected through sale of goods and services and its value when used to purchase supplies, capital and labor. Of course that affects some firms more than others. Proper allocation of resources depends largely on the limits of production which are diminishing rapidly as technology explodes. There may be a few products out there that are limited in production by lack of raw resources but I can't think of any that couldn't be classed as luxury items and labor is plentiful in most economies, at least those that aren't locked down. Where both poverty and a work ethic exist, increased demand would not lead to a misallocation of resources, but rather to a correction of currently misallocated resources.
    1
  1588.  @all2jesus  That equilibrium point will not be the same point as before though. It will have a higher area under the curve which means more product will have been distributed and people and firms will have benefitted absolutely. If this monetary injection leads to a price spiral then other problems weigh heavier into the equation and the overall value of the policy is greatly diminished.
    1
  1589.  @all2jesus  I don't think supply will go up faster than prices. Prices will go up as soon as sellers realize that their inventory is being exhausted. That will stimulate orders which will increase production until the limits of production are reached, at which point the limits of production are addressed and if possible, relieved. So long as inventory moves faster than orders can be filled the prices will rise. Once production outpaces sales then inventories will grow and price hikes will slow.
    1
  1590. I think Pakistan is more likely to unite with Iran than with India, especially if India remains Hindu chauvinist. An Iranian-Pakistani state would be able to stand up against India, and probably be the stronger entity.
    1
  1591.  Arup Ratan Mitra  Good point.
    1
  1592.  @SammyGJr19  She should make that argument on Columbus Day.
    1
  1593.  @SammyGJr19  It's coming up in October, and it usually does make national news, but it doesn't hold the narrative very long.
    1
  1594.  @Krushtykon  That's an overly generous description of British colonial policy. Though it is true that Britain was restricting movement of colonists into the Ohio Valley (basically killing Indians and taking their land), which was one of the main impetuses for independence, the other being tax avoidance, it wasn't like the British hadn't already taken all the land along the Atlantic seaboard.
    1
  1595. I can't stand Trump and I think what he's doing is terrible, but the guy on the right who I'm generally in agreement with really needs to have his mic cut if he can't let his fellow panelist speak without interrupting him.
    1
  1596. So what's the view in the countryside. If protests in the city reflect feeling in the hinterlands than there might be something there. Otherwise the dog has no teeth.
    1
  1597. That's one seriously expensive band-aid.
    1
  1598.  @davenobody407  I wasn't referring to Hitler's navy, I was referring to Wilhelm's.
    1
  1599.  @davenobody407  To some extant I'd agree, but I think the Kriegsmarine was more on par with the British Imperial Navy than the PLAN is with the U.S. Navy is now, at least it was by 1914.
    1
  1600.  @lynnji2260  Yeah, I'm not holding my breath, but it would be nice.
    1
  1601. That is a disturbing line of logic. The reason consumers would consider public goods of secondary importance is because of the assumption that the purchase of those goods would still be covered by others, or that they are too costly to purchase individually.
    1
  1602.  @brunopbch  That depends on the power and professionalism of the purchaser.
    1
  1603.  @danielm5161  They're really not pushing the boundaries of what is possible. What they've done has already been done many times before. They are pushing what's already been done into the private sector. We can argue about what the value of such a move is for humanity.
    1
  1604.  White Noise  Thank you for leaving my party. You're not wanted.
    1
  1605. China: A Tale of Two Rivers.
    1
  1606.  @larrythao1414  This is one of the reasons we shouldn't be telling separatist minorities that they can have their own states. And we certainly shouldn't be telling them that we'll support them in their struggle against their government.
    1
  1607.  @tntmay20  Hong Kong isn't owned by anybody. It's part of China because it's a Chinese city and always has been, even when governed by the British and the Japanese.
    1
  1608. The Nationalist government was based in Nanjing (and Chongqing during the Japanese occupation of Nanjing), not Beijing.
    1
  1609. You've got one hell of a bathtub.
    1
  1610. We owe so much to the precedents set by John Adams.
    1
  1611. I think Japan is going robotic.
    1
  1612. "With regards to China…" China is the country we blame everything on when we are unwilling to do the things we need to do to take care of ourselves, now that we no longer blame Japan.
    1
  1613. Not helpful.
    1
  1614.  @kyled4132  But Trump is a racist and his supporters are either racist, racism tolerant, or clueless. If the country ever does view Trump in a positive light then it's definitely not time for Democrats to give up on their moral standards. In fact it's exactly at that point that it is most important for someone (i.e. Democrats) to try to recover our basic decency and our national dignity. You may not give a shit, but some of us love our country.
    1
  1615.  @kyled4132  Those of us who can see what's flashing in front of our faces take it seriously. Those of us who have seen what this kind of rhetoric leads to historically take it seriously. I'm not quick to call someone a racist exactly because I consider it to be a damning charge, but what's going on right now is dangerous, demeaning and obvious. If you don't want to call it racism then you are in denial. And the reason the black population votes overwhelmingly Democratic is because if they want to vote for someone with any remote chance of winning the office their choices are between the party that takes them for granted and the party that's out to marginalize them. It's a crappy choice, but an obvious one for anybody with any sense of self preservation.
    1
  1616.  @phennah9mm461  Because he says people are dangerous or undeserving because of their race or other characteristics that correspond to their race. He suggests that people of certain heritages misbehave at a higher rate than normal, usually contrary to research statistics. Also, he minimizes and/or normalizes destructive behavior of racists and people in racist groups directed towards racial minorities in order to make them comfortable with their poisonous ideology. For the record, I'm not news, fake or otherwise, nor do I pretend to be.
    1
  1617. I'm guessing here, so take it with a grain of salt. I think there are folks in the State Dept. and the Intel community in the U.S. that hope to defeat the Russians the way that the Soviets were defeated in Afghanistan. In this approach Russia will be tied to a warzone for about five years which will result in constant international condemnation, eventual disenchantment by the Russian populace, the bankrupting of the Russian economy, and hopefully the collapse of the Russian government. The cost of this approach is minimal for the United States which supplies the resistance with light arms that are easy to ship and don't require a lot of expertise to use. The cost to the Ukraine is wholesale destruction of the country while it slowly bleeds to death. Some big guns can be delivered, but most would be held back both to preserve the NATO arsenal and to avoid escalation into NATO territory which at this point neither NATO nor Russia wants.
    1
  1618.  @ivermec-tin666  Iran is not tribal, but I'm not sure Trump realizes that. At some point the rest of the world is going to support somebody who stands up to the United States. Whether or not it's Iran now, I do not know.
    1
  1619.  @altrabodyltd7328  I don't know that tonnage is the best measure of a navy's effectiveness. Of course, I don't think raw number of ships is either. What the ships can do and whether or not they can protect themselves are the measures by which I think a navy should be measured, specifically in regard to the likely field of battle.
    1
  1620.  @bubblebreak4160  But it's a huge risk. If you're going to kill the king, you have to kill the king.
    1
  1621.  @TaylerSpliff  That's an interesting refutation to the rule of law. It's also nonsense. Mob violence does not invalidate a law unless it destroys the whole system.
    1
  1622. If people don't have money then distribution is inefficient. Products have to be distributed to people. If this is not happening because the money is not in people's hands than you create an artificial scarcity, people suffer, and the economy shrinks.
    1
  1623.  @all2jesus  Collecting money through taxation and redistributing it universally is not creating an artificial money supply, it's reallocating it form one crucial mechanism—investment, which allows for firms to establish themselves or to borrow to make large capital purchases—to an equally crucial mechanism—purchase, which provides income for firms allowing them to maintain their capital, employ workers, and pay back their investors with interest. This allows a government to effect the balance between these two crucial mechanisms. And let's be real, it helps them get votes. One thing a lot of people seem to forget is that the economy is supposed to be a tool for the people, not the other way around. In order for the economy to be an effective tool it has to be efficient, but it shouldn't chew people up and spit them out in order to maximize efficiency. This means that firms shouldn't be able to abuse and exploit its human workforce. It also means that people shouldn't have to be left penniless just because the economy has no current use for them (I'll save the commentary on the psychological damage of this predicament for another thread).
    1
  1624.  @all2jesus  While we might have some agreement about the broadest of goals I doubt we'll ever see eye-to-eye on the best way to achieve these goals. Your comment about the consequences of taxing firms is one I disagree with. When a business is taxed it's a tax on profits. This doesn't effect the means of production, including labor. The exception to this is payroll tax, which I think we are in agreement that that should not be a tax. I have a very different view of charities, most of which I consider scams. I think dependence on charities for the well-being of any people is an indication of the failure of government to protect the citizenry and promote the general welfare. I also really don't like the way that philanthropy offers a salve to the souls of the most avaricious among us or the way it allows those who are most fortunate to skew the funding priorities of society to their pet projects. Not to mention the talent and energy wasted chasing grants. Our best scientists spend most of their time begging, the science is done by unpaid grad students.
    1
  1625.  @2Hot2  You have no clue how the Chinese think.
    1
  1626.  @2Hot2  Maybe you shouldn't rely on Charlie Chan movies to determine the character of an entire civilization.
    1
  1627. Fourteenth Amendment was ratified after the Civil War.
    1
  1628. I got the feeling the business showcased here was much more of a distributor than a funder. I could be wrong though.
    1
  1629. The U.S. is concerned about somebody else being the big dog in East Asia. The best case for American dominance in the region is protection of the trade routes of our long-term allies, South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines, to Europe and the Middle East from a China that might block their access, especially considering their long-term animosity towards Japan. While I think this plays a role, I think the actual reasoning runs more along the lines of China becoming a powerful enough entity to challenge American leadership on all sorts of global stages. And as long as the United States can thwart this high priority of the PRC, the U.S. can claim to be more powerful than China. It's playground politics at its worst.
    1
  1630. India is many things, some great and some small. India is not a deterrent to China regarding anything to do with Taiwan. I'm sorry, it just isn't.
    1
  1631. Apparently the official merchandise is made in California but there is some confusion as to the source of the materials.
    1
  1632. Engineers! - Let Us Try
    1
  1633. I got an idea. Why don't we call it a Welcome Center. We could build a 2000-mile long campus with bathrooms, showers and laundry facilities where people trying to improve their lives could get a decent meal and get properly cleaned up and maybe get some decent medical and dental attention and where they could talk to a lawyer. They could then be properly informed about the importance of working for at least a minimum wage so that they're not undercutting American workers and how to report shady businesses that try to employ them for less. They could be encouraged to bring their families so that the money they make is spent in the U.S. instead of sent to other countries. Something like that might even cut into the human trafficking business across the border. Y'know, I might even support giving him $5billion for that.
    1
  1634. i-Space, Galactic Energy…,
    1
  1635.  @Dididong11  For a lot of people the masks are troubling. It comes off as cowardly: willing to upset the apple cart but unwilling to pay the price for doing so. If there's more meaning to it please let me know.
    1
  1636.  @Dididong11  I understand why they wear the masks. Part of a successful civil disobedience action is facing consequences defiantly. By wearing the masks the protesters are signifying that they don't care enough about their issue to advocate openly. I don't think I would necessarily be braver than they are, but when you compare them to the marchers at Selma or the followers of Ghandi these kids look, rightly or wrongly, both more thuggish and less ideologically committed.
    1
  1637. In 1998 nobody was saying China was going to become the next superpower in just a few years. In fact, an awful lot of westerners were sure that China was on the verge of collapse, especially after having devoted so much capital and resources to stemming the "Asian Flu" economic meltdown, and even China's supporters were talking about decades before China became a player of any consequence outside of its backyard. China's economic progress has been unparalleled since, their military is growing and modernizing and their forays into global leadership and institution building are becoming ever more confident. They're still a fair distance from the position the United States holds as a global superpower and probably will be for a few decades but outside of the U.S. they really have no real competition.
    1
  1638. So said Hitler and Napoleon.
    1
  1639.  @GameOvais  I saw that argument made by Scott Ritter, and I think he may be right to some extent. I'm certainly no strategist. The takeaway I'm getting from this conflict so far is that war is a difficult business. I've always heard anecdotes about things like the fog of war and that "the enemy gets a vote" and of course, "the best laid plans of mice and men…". I have no insight on what Russian intentions were at the beginning, I'm guessing as much as anybody else, but I suspect that there were optimists in Putin's inner circle that thought that Ukraine could be forced to come to terms quickly when faced with a full-on assault, and that resistance to the degree it was encountered was somewhat unexpected. At least the Russians didn't assume that the country could be defeated by air power alone. I think that in the long run, whether it was planned or not to make a show of force near Kiev and then back out, Russia will destroy the Ukrainian army and obtain the military victory, unless NATO actually comes in on the ground. Whether Russia occupies, inserts a puppet government, or divides the country into pieces ala Yugoslavia, I don't know, but I would be shocked if Russia leaves without making sure that NATO has no opportunity to establish a presence in at least the eastern half of what is now Ukraine.
    1
  1640.  @michstockholm1164  We all make assumptions, and being flooded with propaganda, those assumptions are constantly being encouraged. Nobody at my level knows what's really going on, myself included.
    1
  1641.  @ThePandafriend  "Casualties on the Russian side have been harder to assess with the country’s defence minister saying on March 25 – its most recent update – that 1,351 of its soldiers have been killed in combat, while 3,825 were wounded. Ukraine says 19,000 Russian soldiers have been killed. However, experts say figures by both parties cannot be trusted as Kyiv is likely to inflate them to boost the morale of its troops, while Russia is probably downplaying them."—AlJazeera 08April2022 The gap between claims is extreme and the real numbers could be anywhere in that window. Fancier equipment requires more extensive training and it seems that for the moment NATO is dumping its obsolete equipment into the conflict. Ukraine definitely has the advantage regarding asymmetrical tactics which could very well wear down the Russians over time.
    1
  1642.  snoop alert  You seem to have a good grip on how it would play out. It's definitely hard to vote with your feet when the service is a monopoly. However, with government you can fire the administrators at election time if you can find enough like-minded voters. I think I have a more favorable view of bureaucracy than you do. Bureaucracy is a tool for efficiency but it can be corrupted. The problems of bureaucracy that you listed above are just as likely to corrupt a corporation as they are a government. If there are government and corporate options than you can weigh the costs and benefits and choose which one is best for you. If there is only one option, whether it's corporate or government, then I guess you're stuck with it.
    1
  1643. That's a sensible approach if you don't have the budget build a proper battle fleet.
    1
  1644. During the second Bush administration Republican lawmakers stopped doing town meetings because they didn't like the visuals. That may happen again.
    1
  1645. Maybe we could have it like other countries that don't pay their employees enough to get by. If you want to get through airport security, you'll have to "tip" the TSA agent twenty bucks.
    1
  1646.  @abbieprice3430  It's called outgoing adoption and it appears to target African American children and children with disabilities—so the most vulnerable families and communities. Big surprise.
    1
  1647. True. At present though it is benefiting one party more than the other.
    1
  1648.  @03mai67  The vast majority of states recognize the ROK; very few recognize the ROC.
    1
  1649.  @tianko5609  Whether you need it or not you will get outsider opinion and it will be backed up with overwhelming force.
    1
  1650.  tea drinker  China is not known to be committing genocide. It is aggressively suppressing separatism and some of the practices are questionable from a humanitarian standpoint. Questionable practices are also exercised by the United States and Russia, as well as many other UN members outside of the permanent five.
    1
  1651. Point 1: Yes, we need to invest in key core industries, just like China does. Point 2: No, the sooner we accept that Taiwan is part of China and that China has every right and reason to reincorporate it the less likely that we'll get dragged into the kind of war that will cost, at the very least, tens of thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars, and could very well leave the United States crippled militarily to the point of losing our position in the world as a global leader. Point 3: Maybe, Tightening up global trade rules is important, but China has to be involved in the effort or they'll ignore the parts that they disagree with just like they do now, and coincidentally, just like the United States does now. Strength hath its privileges. Point 4: Yes, see point 1. Point 5: Okay, but make sure you play fair. If we're going to ban Chinese companies from U.S. stock markets than we need to ban comparable foreign companies from other states that treat American companies the way China does. As it is, I don't think American companies are allowed on Chinese stock markets. If that's the case then turnabout is fair play. Point 6: Seriously? Any thorough look at any of the conflicts in China will show a complete absence of credible evidence of genocide or forced labor. Nobody is accusing China of genocide that doesn't already have an axe to grind. This includes Adrien Zenz, ASPI, The World Uighur Congress, ETIM, Falun Gong and so on and so forth. These entities are dependent on funding by either military contractors or the National Endowment for Democracy, an NGO whose purpose is to undermine governments (which they do by promoting unrest among the people) that do not adhere to the liberal democratic model outside of Saudi Arabia and the gulf states. That funding doesn't necessarily make the claims invalid, but it makes them highly suspect. That, combined with the complete lack of hard evidence, suggests that if a genocide is occurring, that it is extremely well hidden. We can have another American century, but we are going to have to share it with China. We can do so in a way that allows both countries to thrive, or we can tear each other to pieces, but the days when the United States can ignore China's needs and priorities without consequences is, if not over, rapidly disappearing. The more Americans understand China (the good, the bad, and the ugly) the better chance we have of comfortably coexisting with them. I'm afraid Senator Rubio and the other China bashers in American politics are just making that necessary coexistence harder and harder to achieve. We need to compete with China on the track, not in the ring. If we try to win by running faster, everybody benefits even if we come in a close second. If we try to win by beating them up, we'll find out that they can hit back, and in the end everybody's bruised and bloodied.
    1
  1652. I don't think anything is verifiable right now.
    1
  1653.  @omnomnom5359  The Chinese are not a race. They're not even a nationality. They're a people defined by membership in an empire, very much like Americans.
    1
  1654.  @Sooner-im9qf  Democracies are no better than any other system. In fact they are very high-maintenance. What matters is the level of corruption. This includes legal corruption like Citizens United. Governments' top responsibility is taking care of the people. Uncorrupted (or less corrupted, no government is completely uncorrupted) governments that take that responsibility seriously are good governments, regardless of their system. Governments in which the policy makers and executors value their own wealth and comfort above the welfare of the people and siphon off resources for themselves and their friends and families fail because there is no trust. This is just as likely to be the case in a democracy as it is in an autocracy, in part because the people are often highly corruptible.
    1
  1655. I don't think India is nearly as relevant as Russia.
    1
  1656.  @Castapher  According to this fellow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7s-llqrkYk China walked away from Moscow with pretty much everything they asked for at India's expense. I'm not sure what you mean by "Tibet which originally belonged to India." It appears that in 1914 southern Tibet was ceded to the British by the 13th Dalai Lama but that was never recognized by China and Chinese claims on Tibet go back to the Yuan Dynasty.
    1
  1657. Cold War era ideology on the western side was anything but unbiased. I read in a science publication from the seventies that the Soviets were not the first to successfully send and return a man from space because he had to parachute out at the end. We all label as true that which feeds our bias and label as propaganda that which does not. There is actual truth, and we all seek it until it begins to offend us, at which point we seek it much less enthusiastically. We settle, because the truth hurts. This is true of progressives. It is also true of conservatives. And it was just as true of Truman, Churchill and Reagan as it was of Lenin, Stalin and Mao.
    1
  1658. Not without a Constitutional Amendment you can't.
    1
  1659. I'm a Democrat and there is nothing more I would like to see than the end of the nightmare of Trump's tenure. I don't like having bad relations with Russia however. And while I have no illusions about Putin being a great guy, I do think he is good for Russia and I think he has lots of reasons, some of them quite understandable, for despising the United States. I'm also a veteran, and the idea of any country putting out a bounty on the heads of American soldiers makes my blood boil. If it turns out to be true, I feel quite strongly that this is something worth fighting over. I would love for this to be not true. I don't trust the NYT when it reports on countries that don't have liberal governments because I've seen them repeatedly go after Russia, China, Iran and others well beyond what responsible journalism should both dictate and limit. I know they don't like countries that don't give the press freedom to go wherever and say whatever they want, and to some extent I understand that, but I feel like it's led to some pretty shoddy journalism in the past, and in the present as well. That being said, this kind of allegation should not be dismissed out of hand any more than it should be totally accepted on their word. We need to find out if this really happened before saying categorically that it didn't. There needs to be a thorough investigation and it needs to have the full-throated support of Congress and the President. And if it is determined that this really happened, then there need to be real consequences—painful consequences.
    1
  1660.  Caleb Ryan Koko  Why not fifty years ago? Because the Korean War got in the way. China will take Taiwan by 2049. It's up to Taiwan whether or not it's a bloodbath.
    1
  1661. I don't think China wants to arrest foreigners in retaliation. What they might do is tell the U.S. that they are flat out going to open all trade to Iran and seriously undermine the sanctions. They might even start investing there and help build up and modernize their military. The unintended consequences of this action (and I'm definitely being alarmist here) may be to create a proxy war in the Middle East that dwarfs the current one being played out in Syria and Yemen.
    1
  1662.  Alfred Wang  I'm not sure I'd call it western. It's Russian.
    1
  1663.  @binzhang6497  BBC is the British public broadcaster. They are quintessentially Western. They are highly professional with strong journalistic standards. However, they clearly have a Western bias that can be detected in their consistently negative coverage of countries like China, Russia and Iran. VOA is an American propaganda station aimed at destabilizing regimes that the U.S. government does not approve of. It's definitely Western, but its intent outweighs its concern for fairness or professionalism. CNN is a private American news channel. It has strong Western points of view and has some moderate inherent Western biases as well as Western and sensationalist biases tied to its commercial interests that compete with its journalistic standards because of its dependence on the market. I think the BBC and CNN are both worth watching despite their biases. They both have strong enough levels of journalistic professionalism, just be aware of where they come from. I wouldn't trust VOA any more than I would trust RT; both are agenda driven. Though it might give some balance to view both of them on a given story and split the difference.
    1
  1664.  @preityb200  China's human rights record is considerably better than Saudi Arabia's.
    1
  1665. I'm in the same boat. I was confident Russia wouldn't attack at this time, but I was wrong.
    1
  1666.  @ak203  True enough. I'm a total nobody. But I don't feel like my track record is worse than the average pundit's.
    1
  1667. There's no crazy dictator.
    1
  1668. I don't think a helicarrier is realistic, at least not one that remains airborne indefinitely. It would require too much fuel and a simple mechanical issue would spell the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, as well as the loss of an insanely expensive platform. What would be more feasible would be an airship. Of course a lighter-than-air craft that could hold an air wing and all of its components would be incredibly large.
    1
  1669. I hope that guy who lit his hand on fire throwing that molotov cocktail is all right.
    1
  1670. It certainly matches Zeihan's belief that China is somehow weak and incapable of dealing with the next crisis, contrary to its history.
    1
  1671. You can climb down now.
    1
  1672.  @josearaujo8616  A state of emergency is just that, something bad is happening that threatens the peoples' immediate welfare. It may, or it may not, be justification for suspending normal operations or taking extraordinary measures. Just because you have a state of emergency doesn't mean you have to dissolve the legislature, though usually the best branch to deal with it in a timely manner is the executive (assuming you don't have a complete idiot running the executive). The use of extraordinary powers during a state of emergency can admittedly be a tool for undermining a democracy and it should be monitored very closely but there are events short of invasion that I would consider worthy of declaration of a state of emergency, and I would include a pandemic in that short list.
    1
  1673.  @josearaujo8616  You're right about the vulnerability of democracies to dictatorship during crises. But you're still conflating freedom with democracy and they are two completely independent concepts. You can have freedom with or without democracy and you can have democracy with or without freedom. It's perfectly fine for you to desire and defend both, but they're not the same thing.
    1
  1674.  @josearaujo8616  I'm not trying to be condescending when I say this. I mean this sincerely. I'm sorry that your disappointed in the way people are willing to give up some freedom for safety. Our survival instincts are strong and people have always been willing to make that trade. You're probably going to see it many times in your life. While I don't worship freedom the way a lot of my peers do, I am very concerned about who is in charge during this crisis and if power is seized who is in place to seize it. After all, some dictators are ,more palatable than others. Having said that, I don't want to see democracy undermined in my country. It's too much of a fundamental part of our identity. Even though I find the choices of our electorate to be regularly disappointing, I don't think it's worth destroying in the extreme off-chance that we may get something marginally better. I may not love freedom, but I despise revolution. Anyway, I hope you're being safe and acting responsibly during this crisis. If not I'll be sending my secret police out to re-educate you. Have a great day, Alan
    1
  1675.  @stefanjohansson6316  Hopefully you've got some guidelines written into your legal code somewhere. Otherwise it's a gamble someone takes and either they get shot down or succeed. There are real states of emergency though. There are times that decisive leadership is necessary. And yes, there is always a danger that once someone has been granted extra authority that it's very difficult to withdraw it. All of your concerns are legitimate, and you have every right to bring those concerns out and to advocate for position. And you may win, but you may be overruled, whether you think that's acceptable or not. That's how politics goes, and it doesn't always lead to happy endings.
    1
  1676.  @stefanjohansson6316  It's very ironic indeed, and no I don't have to defend democracy because democracy is not a panacea, it's one of a number of legitimate forms of government. The loss of democracy in the United States and a number of other current democracies would be very destabilizing and very dangerous because of that. I will defend democracy in countries where democracy is currently the legitimate and functional form of government on those grounds. However, democracy doesn't mean total lack of leadership in a crisis. The President, Chancellor or Prime Minister in a democracy is the people's top official and s/he should be expected to take the measures necessary to both protect the people as subjects and to obey the people as sovereign.
    1
  1677.  @gigachadkartik  Everybody's economy is dying right now.
    1
  1678. It allows it to clear lower overpasses.
    1
  1679. It would be in Republicans' interest to remove him from office and make him ineligible to run again. That way they wouldn't have to worry about him messing up their primary in 2024, and nobody would have to worry about him ever setting foot in the White House again.
    1
  1680. Buttigieg/Abrams 2028?
    1
  1681.  Chen Huang  So far we haven't seen anything like what was going on in Hong Kong.
    1
  1682.  @jameslopez5652  So what is your solution?
    1
  1683.  @josephwalsh7546  The Chinese Communist Party is meritocratic, effective and authoritarian. The Democratic party is nepotistic, impotent, and liberal. I don't see the pattern.
    1
  1684. It's during these kinds of crises that we see the weakness of our system of provincial quasi-sovereignty. This is exactly the time that we need a full-court press national response. It would help if we had a leader that had an interest in the welfare of the country's citizens rather than a tycoon whose primary interest is in the vacancy rate of his hotels, but alas…. Nobody in America prepared for the virus as we watched it tear through East Asia and Italy: not the Governors, not the President, not Congress, and not me. We are all responsible for failing to prepare for what was obviously coming, and we all got caught. The difference between the President and about half of the state governors is that once the virus hit their citizens, many of these governors swung into action, listened to the doctors and scientists, and shut everything down in order to halt the spread. What the President did was downplay the disease, flinch noticeably at every effort to combat or control the virus, attack reporters who pointed out his obvious lies, give himself rave reviews on his performance , blame everyone he could think of (except himself) for why bad things were happening, and push to stop the efforts to deal with the problem while the United States is still the country with the most known cases and deaths.
    1
  1685.  @Chinese080808  That's what courts are for. I said I thought the terms were lenient. But the goal should be rehabilitation, not revenge.
    1
  1686.  @donalain69  Law is the codification of social priorities and it can be corrupt if those priorities are corrupt, an example in my view would be the property occupation laws prevalent in twentieth century America that red-lined various neighborhoods excluding people of color, but this would require us to define what purity of law actually is. Is a law corrupt just because it treats a segment of society that has no control over it's defined condition like dirt? If I take your statement literally I must acknowledge that there are laws that are not corrupt. Whether or not the corrupt laws have to be included in the overarching term "law" and whether that presence is sufficient to make "law" corrupt is a subject for debate.
    1
  1687.  @andrewlim7751  Yes, I do know why the Chinese keep building their navy. And judging by the concentration of destroyers and corvettes, I think they've got submarines on their minds.
    1
  1688. China's not suggesting that that this is free speech. China's using the tools it has to minimize support for a separatist movement.
    1
  1689. First we have to get a player that's a little closer to Putin's level of competency.
    1
  1690. Saying that their arrest was likely in retaliation for the Meng arrest is not really denying that they were spies. They are not saying one way or the other whether or not they are guilty of espionage, just that the actual moment that China chose to arrest them was probably influenced by what the Canadian government did.
    1
  1691. It looks to me like the police have been doing a commendable job considering the size and duration of these protests. I can't imagine going to work everyday knowing that this is what it's going to be like every day. I'd be exhausted.
    1
  1692. Economic sanctions from the west is not blackmail, it's extortion.
    1
  1693.  @GETJUSTICE4U  "None of this war damage and misery, (for many, but not all) would have happened if the Ukraine army observed the cease fire laid down in the Minsk agreement, and Zalenzki complied with the said agreement." The same thing could be said that if Russia had reconciled itself to being a minor country on the outskirts of Europe that none of this would have happened. Giving up a substantial chunk of territory is not the kind of thing that a country with any self-respect can go along with, and I don't think Ukraine could be reasonably expected to swallow that pill. Likewise, Russia's position watching the tide of NATO sweep up their beaches is also completely understandable if one is not so immersed in western exceptionalism as to be delusional, which, for better or worse, most folks in the United States and Europe seem to be. The ones who could have made this never happen without a substantial loss of dignity were Ukraine's "friends" out here in the West, but that opportunity evaporated eight years ago.
    1
  1694.  @frederickstewart3845  I don't know what to make of you're response. I don't understand it.
    1
  1695. Because a lot of Americans believe that if you have power and you're not afraid of God's wrath than you're destined to abuse your power and screw them over for personal gain.
    1
  1696. Advantage PRC.
    1
  1697. That certainly would have solved the Hong Kong problem. The PRC would have rolled in with tanks and Hong Kong would now be a neighborhood of Shenzhen.
    1
  1698. You should see the girl they have in Hong Kong.
    1
  1699. You do understand that that's the kind of behavior this program is designed to discourage, right?
    1
  1700. That would require more than a loss for Trump. You'd have to have make sure you had substantial majorities in both houses of Congress. Trump's supporters are beginning to define themselves by opposition to Ukrainian assistance.
    1
  1701.  @leithx7595  He's saying that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
    1
  1702. That statement at the end is definitely food for thought.
    1
  1703. Unsupported offensive strike—Marines, Unsupported defensive stand—Army.
    1
  1704.  @PedanticNo1  I'm thinking rampant piracy.
    1
  1705. I think you're trying to make trouble where there ain't none. Things change over time and China and Russia may one day see each other as adversaries, but I don't think that's going to be any time soon. I know the last century was dominated by political ideologies and their determination to destroy all competition, I think China and Russia have kind of matured beyond that. They no longer care what each other's political system is, or what anybody else's political system is. If the United States steps back from East Asia, I don't think democracy is going to play much of a role in who the second tier powers align with. They may align with Russia to counter balance China's dominance. Some may align with Russia because they have territorial disputes with China, but so long as China and Russia aren't working against each other, I don't think that will matter much.
    1
  1706.  @KingZercules  Actually most people in Taiwan have ancestral villages on the mainland. If people in Taiwan can be identified as trouble makers they could be repatriated to their ancestral villages where trouble making would become a lot more complicated. I don't know if China would do this, but it would be an option for them.
    1
  1707.  @KingZercules  I'd say they just want to win a decisive victory to put their country back together and get this nightmare of division behind them. Don't get me wrong, China is not above intimidating other countries, but then again, no great power ever has been.
    1
  1708.  @mrlassotool  Actually I think he might be right about that. China's lost a lot of territory in the last two centuries and as I mentally circle the country most of the bordering states have some issue or other. Of course, some disputes are serious and others, not so much. A lot of these countries have more of an interest in collaborating with China than they do with arguing with them.
    1
  1709.  @hubewa24  In fairness that's how half the United States have handled the vaccination situation. Unfortunately you need more than half the country on board to effectively fight an epidemic. Half the country cares about people. The other half only cares about business.
    1
  1710. The "half" of Americans Who give Trump high marks for his handling of the COVID-19 virus are, er, I'd have to say brainwashed. Trump has obviously done just about everything wrong that he possibly could.
    1
  1711.  @beastmode8203  I thought "tanky" was someone who was pro-China beyond the point of common sense. I didn't mention China at all. Am I wrong about the definition?
    1
  1712.  Gooey 911  I guess it's started.
    1
  1713. I'm not sure the Russians see this as a bad thing. Russia is already within range of every nuclear arsenal on the planet, all of which are either hostile or potentially hostile. I don't think they care much about whether or not Iran has nuclear weapons. What they do care a lot about is the reputation and influence of the United States worldwide which is currently in a death spiral. I think for Russia and slightly less so for China, this is a great opportunity to look like the adults in the world as they disagree vehemently with American policy. If they had anything that could undermine Trump's position as America's leader I think this would be the perfect time to keep it locked away in a vault at the bottom of the sea.
    1
  1714. That's dead brothel owners to you, dammit.
    1
  1715. We can demand all we want. China will tell us where to stick it.
    1
  1716. Be careful what you wish for.
    1
  1717. Five if you include Outer Mongolia.
    1
  1718. I thought I saw a thumbnail suggesting that he wished to start a dialog with Beijing. If I didn't misinterpret that, it would be a welcome first step.
    1
  1719.  @willengel-vs8ht  I wouldn't doubt it.
    1
  1720. Yeah, it's pretty sad that Putin has to be the adult in the room and reign Trump in… and scary.
    1
  1721. I think the U.S. and China underestimate each other at their peril. I think the move towards unmanned craft is crucial to victory, but I think China is already aware of this, and they are the gold standard in drone technology and production. The U.S. is in good shape with superior air assets (quantitatively) and the fact that they have more seaborne surface missile saturation capacity works to the U.S. advantage, but if the location of hostilities is in the vicinity of Taiwan, one has to include the Chinese land-based missiles as well, and the Chinese have the largest terrestrial missile force in the world. The fact that so many of the Chinese vessels are destroyers, frigates, and corvettes suggests an emphasis on anti-submarine warfare. If the U.S. isn't being needed elsewhere in the world and could bring their whole navy to the region, that would be an awful lot for the Chinese to deal with.
    1
  1722. Russia wouldn't likely absorb eastern Ukraine into its territory. They would probably establish a new country that, regardless of its eventual name, would be East Ukraine. They would make sure that a pro-Russian government ran the country. This would give them the buffer zone they seek.
    1
  1723.  @karlparratt1730  Putin is many terrible things, but an idiot is not one of them. Of course his buffer zone would be NATO adjacent, that's the very nature of a buffer zone. And while having a western Ukrainian state in NATO would be bringing NATO closer to Russia, it wouldn't be as close as having the entire Ukraine in NATO, which is what he is determined to avoid. I'm sure that Putin is aware that former soviet client states despise Russia for a number of reasons. They feel like the Soviets manipulated them politically, oppressed them personally, and held them back economically, and on top of all that the people of these states bought into their own ethnic nationalism. Access to the west has provided most of them with lifestyles that appear more affluent than their Russian counterparts. It will be a long time before Russia appears favorably in the eyes of most Poles, Czechs and Hungarians. I don't think this is lost on Putin, but I don't think he feels that the hearts and minds of the peoples of the former Warsaw Pact are realistically capturable. I don't think he's going to waste resources on that approach. He's concentrating on political control, or at least political neutrality, of the former republics that currently lie on the borders of Russia because that is the extent of his reach and he knows it.
    1
  1724. I agree. China's not ready for this yet and they know it.
    1
  1725.  @bigwildcat2020  I agree. From a preparedness standpoint you should always assume that your adversary is both stronger than you think and crazy enough to attack even if they can't win. This is the viewpoint of the American military and it is the appropriate viewpoint. My personal assessment is that the Chinese are viewing the Taiwan resistance and their allies, including the United States, the same way. Hence, they're not ready, and I don't think they will attack in the next fifteen years. That does not mean one shouldn't be prepared in case China's assessment does not match my expectations of it (their assessment, not China).
    1
  1726.  @bigwildcat2020  You may be right. I don't think that China thinks they are ready yet though.
    1
  1727.  @bigwildcat2020  China can walk and chew gum at the same time. The issue with Taiwan is deeply personal to China and while they may be trying to accomplish other things in other parts of the world their heart is always on reunification. China is taking a decidedly non-interventionist approach to foreign policy which allows them to have decent relations with countries that are sworn enemies to each other. It's kind of like how the British dealt with the continental Europeans during the nineteenth century.
    1
  1728.  @bigwildcat2020  The idea that China is stealing everything from the West is a political tool used to get support from people who are angry or frightened because they are no longer competitive and those who are sympathetic to them. Just for the record, I have sympathy for them myself, but it stops short of my feeding into the China blame game. Nobody succeeds at anything without taking advantage of the accomplishments of those who came before. Anyone who tries to reinvent the wheel is doing a great disservice to themselves and to those who depend on them. China used what they had, primarily a promise of access to a huge potential market, to bargain for technology with international manufacturers, and they've done so quite successfully. China and Chinese firms have undoubtedly engaged in some industrial espionage. Of course they are not alone in this pursuit. I recently read the Chernov biography of Alexander Hamilton where he laid out a program that the Treasury Secretary established that paid British engineers to smuggle in factory plans which the British very much considered illegal at the time. I guess the fruits of espionage would be stolen, but not to engage in a little spy work, especially if you're behind technologically, would be stupid. While there are still a few places where China lags behind, at this point it's more efficient and effective to invest in Research and Development than in Industrial Espionage, and China has made that shift. China is investing a great deal of resources into the minds of coming generations and their accomplishments at this point can be considered genuinely Chinese, at least as much as any other countries' accomplishments can be considered theirs.
    1
  1729.  @bigwildcat2020  Thank you. I try to be fair.
    1
  1730.  @bigwildcat2020  The world needs more of those.
    1
  1731.  @bigwildcat2020  I don't know how utopian liberalism is. The absence of government participation is hardly likely to lead to an orderly society.
    1
  1732. No kidding.
    1
  1733. You are wrong. China has no designs on the Philippines. They do want control of the waters west of the Philippines because of the trade routes and their proximity to the choke point at Malacca, but not the islands themselves. Taiwan is different. The Chinese, and by this I mean pretty much all Chinese, view Taiwan as part of China, and view Taiwan's de facto independence as a national insult. China won't attack unless it is sure they can win (2035-2049).
    1
  1734.  @Dies1r4e  Xi hasn't set a date taking Taiwan by force. He's said that Taking Taiwan by force is an option and that Taiwan cannot permitted to declare independence. That, and everything else you mentioned, assuming what you are referring to as polluting fishing waters is island building, are in China's interest, you know, Rational.
    1
  1735.  @Dies1r4e  Attacking a neighbor can be in your interest, but usually it's not. China hasn't attacked a neighbor since Vietnam in 1979, and that didn't go so well. It doesn't relate much to today however—so many things have changed. I guess you can argue that what's in a particular government's interest isn't always in the peoples to which they serve's interest. But on the whole, the CCP has done well for the Chinese people and in most instances the Chinese people feel that the success of the CCP is in their best interests. I would agree.
    1
  1736. Alexander, thank you for the invitation to text you. Unfortunately I'm such a technophobic embarrassment that I don't know how to accept your invitation. Anyways, if NATO accepted Ukraine into the alliance then that would be a moment of reckoning for NATO. A treaty ally would be at war with Russia. Anything short of an immediate roll-in of all NATO allies would be a breach of treaty. An immediate roll-in of all NATO allies would be the beginning of World War Three. It would also be a pendulum swing in motivation. The biggest problem Russia has now is figuring out how to get enough public support to bring enough manpower in to move forward and hold ground. This is a problem Ukraine doesn't have because they are in a desperate situation, they have public support for anything they can bring to bear. If NATO comes in and they attack Russia directly, then I suspect Russia will be able to get whatever public support they need to throw everything they have against NATO, at least in Ukraine, while NATO members will have to try to convince their populations to throw enough blood and treasure into the conflict to stop the now unleashed bear, and the NATO member most able to fight Russia effectively is the one furthest from the fight. NATO leaders understand this, and they don't want to move any further in that direction, especially if they believe (and I'm not sure they do) that Ukraine can beat Russia without NATO membership.
    1
  1737. Because as Majority Leader he controls the agenda of that house which includes the voting schedule. He can basically indefinitely delay any vote on the Senate floor for any bill by failing to schedule it. This is why it's important to hold your nose and vote for a Democrat you don't like rather than sit out in protest. Joe Manchin may piss you off with half his floor votes, but when it comes to leadership elections he'll vote Schumer instead of McConnell.
    1
  1738. All right, but what goes around comes around.
    1
  1739. I wish I could offer you more than encouragement. I hope you bear no more losses and that we can do what's right and end this thing. Best of luck.
    1
  1740.  @logomoko78  How do you know they are innocent?
    1
  1741.  @hughmungus2760  I wouldn't put it past us.
    1
  1742. So much for the Olympic spirit.
    1
  1743. Well, you could stop spying on them.
    1
  1744.  @hagbard72  Don't hold you breath.
    1
  1745. Video would be exceptionally boring. Everuthing happens too slowly to look interesting.
    1
  1746.  @captives6479  You could argue that Anhui, Fujian, Guangdong, Guizhou, Hainan, Hebei, Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Gansu, Jiangxi, Jiangsu, Qinghai, Shaanxi, Shandong, Shanxi, Sichuan, Yunnan, Zhejiang, Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning, were all breakaway provinces and that Tibet, Mongolia, Ningxia Hui Guangxi and Xinjiang were all breakaway regions until 1971 when the world recognized the PRC as the legitimate government of China.
    1
  1747.  @captives6479  So is everything about the whole situation, really.
    1
  1748. I really like this idea.
    1
  1749. Where were you in 1919?
    1
  1750.  @derek3266  It's not necessary. It's not helpful. It's mean and it's dickish. I can't stop you from doing it, but if you do it's because you're a POS. And nobody is calling it that unless they want to piss on China for whatever reason. Right now the Chinese are leading the fight against this thing, much more so than any of their detractors. So taking advantage of this human catastrophe to shit-talk the Chinese… if it ain't racist, it ain't far from it.
    1
  1751. Armenia back to Russia, Azerbaijan back to Iran.
    1
  1752. Anna's biases are reasonable. She's reacting to the vulnerability inherent both for women in their relationships with men and for children in their relationships with adults. Cenk's biases, which, appear to run in the opposite direction, are also reasonable in a socio-political environment that is increasingly leaving the accused, usually adult men, vulnerable to unproven and in many cases unprovable allegations of abuse. Because memory is malleable and lie detectors are not reliable it's possible that nobody knows exactly what happened, including those directly involved, but that doesn't make it any less of a tragedy if abuse actually occurred and went unpunished.
    1
  1753. You comment about how the concept of the nation-state makes no sense outside of Europe and then you advocate for it in South Africa. Peculiar.
    1
  1754.  @sobersu1499  My point is that much of China is rural, and the difference in development between Singapore and China is largely because of that rural element that Singapore doesn't have. While China has definitely learned from Singapore as well as other great cities in East Asia and in the West, China was definitely born to have great cities. China has had great cities for two-thousand years. There is no way they were going to just wallow in urban mediocrity going forward.
    1
  1755.  @Duke19073  Breaking apart into little tiny countries doesn't ever make life better.
    1
  1756.  @yaoliang1580  That's not very nice. However, Taiwan applying for NATO membership would be tantamount to declaring independence which would reignite the civil war. Taiwan might or might not be reincorporated, but the only way that it wouldn't be blacktopped is if it capitulated immediately.
    1
  1757. Hi, idiot who knows nothing here (I'm describing me, not Mr. Scott). So what do I see in the Big Bang? I see mostly the ekpyrotic model. Let me introduce you to my dementia. Imagine two lines within a plane. If you rotate those lines about separate points the point of intersection moves along those lines at varying speeds. Eventually that point of intersection flies off into infinite as the lines move towards parallelism. At the instant that point of intersection disappears into nonexistence another point pops into existence at the other end of infinite and moves to a finite point an infinite distance away from its origin all but instantaneously. Let's take that up a dimension. We now have two planes in space. They're rotating about non-intersecting axes and they are forming a line of intersection that moves within the planes. Let's say that there is a slight resistance between the planes at that moving line of intersection. When those planes rotate into parallelism and a fresh line of intersection is formed at the infinite edge the resistance along that line is even, smooth and ever-present. As that line moves from infinite to a finite location the resistance is almost infinitely intense. And while it's still strong when its nature becomes finite, it's much weaker. So we have our rotating planes with a moving line of intersection then periodically fades out of existence at one end of infinitely only to be slammed back into existence at the other end. You're probably picturing parallel axes which leads to frequent cycles of parallelism between the planes even if they're not rotating at the same rate. But if we postulate moving axes, or independently rotating axes then the instances of parallelism become much less frequent. Let's take it up one more dimension. Now we have two three dimensional infinite-spaces rotating about two independently moving planes within a four-dimensional membrane with a plane of intersection that periodically fades out of existence at one edge of infinite and immediately pops into existence at the other with a violent yet smooth and ever-present energy of resistance that mellows out substantially the moment it reaches a finite space. Yeah I can't really picture it either, but its occurrences of parallelism should be much less frequent. Let's take it up one more dimension. Okay, we now have two branes, each infinite in scope in four spatial(membranous?) directions. Each of these branes is rotating in fifth-dimensional whatever-the-hell-you-call-it about two non-static, non-parallel infinite-geometrical-spaces with an infinite-geometrical-space of intersection that periodically fades out of existence at one edge of infinite and bangs into existence at the other edge of infinite. In that space resistance (in the form of vibrations of membrane material which we can measure as mass) is infinite for the moment that space moves from the edge of infinite to a finite location after which it is still everywhere but no longer infinite. As the branes continue to flow through each other the material becomes acclimated and the vibrations begin to settle. Either inconsistencies in the membranous materials themselves or quantum properties of the vibrations lead to clumping. Some of the more massive clumps rip through the space of intersection and are lost to the flow of the moving membranes down a fourth dimension. The remaining clumps of vibrations warp the space slightly in the direction of the membranous flow which has the tangential effect of moving those clumps towards each other (gravity). Because the resistant vibrations are settling at a steady rate across the space, the objects made up of these vibrations are shrinking. This gives the illusion from the perspective of these shrinking objects that the space between these objects is expanding. This illusion is perpetrated by one of the quantum characteristics of radiation particles. Ejected particles have the uncanny ability to be in multiple possible locations until identified at which point their probability peaks into a certainty at location 0 relative to its identifier. They also, I think, has the uncanny ability to travel at multiple velocities until identified at which point their probability peaks into a certainty at c relative to its identifier. Because the occupants of this space are unaware of this property they assume light always travels at the same speed and engage in all kinds of paradoxical space and time corrupting explanations for why light emitted from a fast-moving object never-the-less always appears to them at that consistent velocity, but I digress. Anyway, I do think our universe is a result of four-dimensional membranes periodically whacking into each other. But I don't think they're moving back and forth on each other, I think they're running through each other and this is because of their rotation. I told you I was nuts.
    1
  1758. Where's my violin?
    1
  1759.  @crocolagerfelden6142  Scientific method requires repeatability. It's a method for experimentation. It's not practical for investigating events that can't be reproduced in a laboratory, and therefore, not very relevant to this discussion.
    1
  1760.  @dotoroyuriha7411  I don't think it's obvious at all. COVID may have originated outside of China, but that begs the question, "Why was Wuhan hit so hard ahead of every other city in the world?" The military games hypothesis is one possible answer, but at this point it is not conclusive at all. It also doesn't explain why there was such a lag between the Wuhan outbreak and the next outbreak which I believe was in Korea.
    1
  1761.  @dotoroyuriha7411  That may be the answer, which I admitted earlier in the thread. I'm still left wondering though, if American soldiers had the disease, then why weren't American cities suffering at the same time.
    1
  1762.  @crocolagerfelden6142  I guess it comes down to what's meant by testing the hypothesis. I'm not sure a hypothesis can be adequately tested without reproduction. It's too easy to associate non-causal correlation without it. Although I'll admit that you could follow the step-by-step procedure laid out in the scientific method minus this key particular. This would be in the spirit of scientific method and might very well be the best approach.
    1
  1763.  @dotoroyuriha7411  But we don't know that it wasn't the flu. COVID symptoms and flu symptoms are very similar. It didn't lock up the hospital beds that COVID did in Wuhan, or later in Europe and America. I'm not saying you are wrong, but at this point we don't know enough to say you're right.
    1
  1764. I haven't noticed that. Perhaps what you think is clear, is in fact bullshit.
    1
  1765.  @shikamaruthehokage  I hope very much that India eventually gets its stuff together. But India has a whole lot of issues that its going to have to take care of before it can even think about competing with China for power status. Class, caste and religious issues keep India's people divided and weak. Economic liberalism, unchecked corruption, bureaucratic disfunction, and the need to cater to group chauvinist instincts to win elections all hamstring the state, which is a big part of the reason India's infrastructure network is so underdeveloped. India has a lot of potential, but it needs a strong leader who breaks down internal group barriers and effectively harnesses the resources of the state to build a meritocratic and efficient bureaucracy and comprehensive infrastructure. It also needs to slow down on the population growth or else its not going to be able to feed itself, much less break out of extreme poverty.
    1
  1766.  @RobertMartin-s2v  You may be right about that. I think though, that if you remove the incumbent you do a lot of damage to the party brand. Of course, you could also say that Biden does a lot of damage to the party brand. I'm not sure I'm right, but I have to go with what I think is our best shot. I think you should go with what you think our best shot is also. I'm sorry we don't agree. I hope that when election day comes that we'll agree enough to work together to keep Trump out. I certainly won't be writing in Biden if you succeed at getting a different Democrat on the ticket.
    1
  1767. They probably both hate China too.
    1
  1768. I appreciate your willingness to present both sides of the argument, but I have one serious complaint. You conflate the aboriginal Taiwanese and their experiences with those of the current residents of Taiwan, of whom 95% are Han Chinese and only about two percent are Native Taiwanese. The actual Native Taiwanese can claim to have always been forcibly ruled by outsiders. According to their experience, the great majority of Taiwan's current residents, including nearly all of those calling for independence, are outsiders. My source is: "Population structure of Han Chinese in the modern Taiwanese population based on 10,000 participants in the Taiwan Biobank project" Chien-Hsiun Chen, Jenn-Hwai Yang, Charleston W.K. Chiang, Chia-Ni Hsiung, Pei-Ei Wu, Li-Ching Chang, Hou-Wei Chu, Josh Chang, I-Wen Song, Show-Ling Yang, Yuan-Tsong Chen, Fu-Tong Liu, Chen-Yang Shen Human Molecular Genetics, Volume 25, Issue 24, 15 December 2016, Pages 5321–5331, https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddw346 Published: 18 October 2016 Article history taken from the "Oxford Academic" website: https://academic.oup.com/hmg/article/25/24/5321/2581402
    1
  1769. It would be nice if the reporter would mention that.
    1
  1770. Taiwan is not another country though.
    1
  1771.  @tadders2172  Tragic and shameful, but a very small part of American military history.
    1
  1772. No, it's not. But thank you for your concern.
    1
  1773. I know I'm out of sync with everybody on this but I do think our embassy should be in Jerusalem. I don't think it should have been done unilaterally though without some corresponding accommodation from Israel. I disagree with Cenk and the rest of America about a two-state solution. Looking at a Palestinian state comprised of two geographically separated enclaves, the larger of which is landlocked, looks to me to be unworkable in the long run. I think a two-state solution is a non-solution. The only viable state in Palestine is Israel and in my view Israel should step up and embrace all Palestinian people (Native Jews/Diaspora Jews/Arab Muslims/Arab Christians/Palestinian Refugees/Others with ties to the land and culture) willing to be law-abiding Israeli citizens and to give them first class Israeli citizenship with the rights and responsibilities inherent in that status including the right to return. I understand why many Israelis don't want to entertain this approach but I think it is the only approach towards lasting peace and things like recognizing Jerusalem as the capital should be held as bargaining assets to move Israel towards meeting its regional responsibilities and not just given away for free. As to Ambassador Haley's irresponsible speech at the U.N., it's kind of what we expect these days. It's been pretty embarrassing to be represented by this lot over the last year; I'm not expecting any improvement any time in the near future. I don't think Donald Trump has the memory or tenacity necessary to actually punish a nation for this vote. Her was never a friend of the world and whatever petty and shortsighted actions he takes were probably going to be taken anyway. He's just telegraphing his punches in the most childish and undiplomatic manner available to him.
    1
  1774. While access to seaports is a major benefit to any country's economy, Ukraine borders the largest economic trading bloc in the world. Losing its ports would be problematic, but it wouldn't take Ukraine out of the global trading economy.
    1
  1775. @g8620784 - Yeah, Samarkand in the east of Uzbekistan to Istanbul in the west of Turkey—they skipped half the Silk Road.
    1
  1776. Most poor countries that select democracy as it's government type languish in poverty in large part because it's hard for democratically elected leaders with short terms to concentrate resources on key industries when everyone in the electorate wants their share of the pie. All countries that have progressed from third world to first world since Bismark's Germany have done so under a strong, usually right-wing government with the authority to funnel capital into key industries and the ability to make business owners toe the line for the national interest. Many of those societies have gone on to become thriving democracies although for some the price of transition was dear. "Letting everyone choose for themselves…" does not lead to freedom, it is the textbook definition of freedom. Freedom is a key concept in western propaganda that most of us buy into without really thinking it through. Freedom is, if not a zero-sum gain, a very low-sum gain. The best way to maximize one's own freedom is to oppress and exploit others because you are most free when others are unquestioningly taking care of your needs, desires and obligations. I would disagree that freedom is a moral concept, in fact I think it's a particularly amoral concept because those with real freedom have the ability to choose between good and evil actions without real consequence. I think you may have intended to suggest that robbing people of all of their freedom is immoral and although I think there are some circumstances where a temporary suspension of freedom might be appropriate I would agree with you on that for the most part.
    1
  1777. Respectfully, I think you've just effectively argued that freedom is an amoral (not to be confused with immoral) concept. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, you're saying that morality is a check on the abuses taken by those exercising their freedom. Anarchy is the extreme form of liberalism, a system where government has no power over individuals. People in an anarchy are totally free of government control, but only those who are strong and lucky prosper at the expense of everyone else.
    1
  1778. I'm glad to hear that you think democracy requires morals. Too many people believe that so long as everyone pursues their own interests that the resulting average will be the best outcome. Morality is taught. It can be taught by religious institutions or by governmental institutions. It's definitely taught by parents and by the larger community. Morality usually ages well as the urge to question everything recedes and you're definitely right about it improving democracy. As for Venezuela, there certainly are a lot of issues there. And while I'm sure that a great many of Venezuela's problems are a result of mismanagement within their government we need to be aware that we Americans did everything we could to make sure that Venezuela failed and we did this for ideological reasons. How much of Venezuela's failure is due to international pressure from the U.S. and our ideological allies is debatable, but I'm confident that it was substantial. As for morals in Venezuela, the working poor who voted in the Chavistas were voting their interests against the industrial classes who were exploiting them while the liberals who were resisting that movement were voting for their interests in hopes of maintaining their wealth and power. Morality was the foundation of neither side but of course it was claimed by both.
    1
  1779. Yes, government can teach morals, both through example and through official education channels like schools. The morality of a government is indeed dictated by the morality of the individuals in government and largely influenced by the historical morality as expressed through law. I don't think we're going to agree on the rights of the state to control key industries, and as I admitted earlier there was mismanagement by the Venezuelan government but the U.S. threw some harsh sanctions on Caracas and arm-twisted all our allies to follow suit. We bankrolled the underground opposition and supported a failed coup. I think that if we tried to help Venezuela instead of sink her then she might have a chance to succeed, but we'll never know because it will not happen.
    1
  1780. Okay, you don't trust government. Whatever. And mia culpa on the sanctions. Apparently the only real sanctions on Venezuela where on arms, military interaction and targeted individuals. I should have been better informed before I made the argument. That being said, I still think that our attempts worldwide to undermine states that dabble in socialism play a large role in many of their failures. I know you don't believe that and I'm not going to change your mind so I'm going to quit trying. I hope for both of our sakes that the government around here never gets as brutal or as one-dimensional as you believe it to be. Best of luck.
    1
  1781.  @AGAG789  The part of my family that is in China is doing fine as far as I know. My wife talks to them pretty regularly. They worry about us in the states because we can't seem to figure out how to deal with a medical crisis. Thank you for the well wishes. I hope you and your family are doing well as well.
    1
  1782. Bullying is pretty much the definition of a roast. It's a contest to see who can say the worst things about the guest of honor and anyone else who gets in the way. There's an argument that it's a horrible tradition, a very snowflakey PC argument, and as a PC snowflake myself I'm somewhat susceptible to that argument. But the anger is misplaced towards Michelle Wolf. She did what she was paid to do, brilliantly. The anger, such that it's warranted, should be against the format, which of course, is an argument against the First Amendment (political speech and all), as is really any argument against verbal abuse. What a complicated web we weave.
    1
  1783.  @Hhbhnnggbb  So you advise using more water?
    1
  1784. J M, the United States has dominated the world since 1989. That level of dominance is beginning to fray but the U.S. will still be a powerful player, one of two-to-four depending on how Europe and Russia move forward, for the next century.
    1
  1785. I don't remember suggesting that "the US has [ever] been like Stalin, Tojo, Hitler, Brezhnev or Xi…". There's more than one way to dominate. The United States has dominated the world mostly with economic and cultural power, first through production dominance during the post-war decades and later with consumption dominance. You can control a lot when you're every countries primary customer. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. There have been issues but on the whole I think the U.S. has been a pretty responsible actor in that role. But now this role is going to be shared with China, maybe Europe, and though much less likely, possibly Russia over the course of the next century.
    1
  1786. I think you're misjudging the situation. I think this is the perfect time for Xi to build up the parts of the world that the United States has largely ignored. Trump's global bellicosity is creating a leadership vacuum that may not last too much beyond his administration. There's a certain amount of risk to playing your hand too soon but you can loose out by being overly cautious as well. I think China's government if it's proven anything over the decades has shown competence in the face of challenge and I suspect they'll do fine. I also have a lot of confidence in the United States as a global player for the foreseeable future and I think the Chinese understand that better than a lot of Americans do.
    1
  1787. One could argue that there would be no cold war if every country were a communist country. What you are suggesting is that there can't be two or more systems and that the single system allowed to avoid war is the liberal democracy. This point of view is highly chauvinistic and increasingly unrealistic. China's doing pretty much exactly what the United States did after WWII with the Marshall Plan, and at that time the U.S. was a lot more concerned about alignment than it was human rights. It really wasn't until the Kennedy Administration that that became a priority, and even then….
    1
  1788. Fairly young are you?
    1
  1789. Your totalitarianism doesn't work argument falls to history. The vast majority of successful long-term governments throughout civilizational history were totalitarian monarchies. It may be that that can no longer work in a modern society, but Saudi Arabia is now 100 years young.
    1
  1790. Congressional hearings are not about finding information, they are about pushing narratives.
    1
  1791. And in today's world, nobody listens to adults (sigh).
    1
  1792.  @steveTGO  Right now China's only real competition is the United States, so maybe big boy (singular). To the extant that manufacturing has moved to other countries, it is the result of the rise in living standards (and the to-be-expected rising cost of labor associated with it) within China. China is strong, smart, and increasingly rich. The damage Trump did to China has been overcome—the same cannot be said for the damage Trump did to the United States.
    1
  1793. What'cha smokin' there?
    1
  1794. OP, And how would he know?
    1
  1795.  @papajoeman23  I would have tried to improve things by working within the system.
    1
  1796.  @papajoeman23  No, that's definitely outside the system, it's secret police activity and it's awful if true. I'm not trying to defend that. But if I were trying to stop it I would pursue as influential a position as I could attain in hopes of being able to order it stopped. I know this is not a perfect answer, but you asked what I would do. I'd probably lay low like everyone else if I were being completely honest. I know governments do terrible things, but so do revolutionaries, and with rare exceptions I fear the latter over the former. Chances of maneuvering into a position to make such a moral decision is no more easily achieved in the insurrection hierarchy than it is in the governing one. At least in a governed state there's some order.
    1
  1797.  @kempkennedy3542  I think both are red flags for potential coercion. Nonetheless, if it indeed does involve wholly consensual adults free from intimidation then I should probably keep my nose out of their business.
    1
  1798. Hong Kong is in Guangdong province.
    1
  1799. China does. China cares a lot more about Taiwan than Russia does about Ukraine.
    1
  1800.  @batswing4473  " the Middle East is in Asia", only because Asia is a catchall term for all the civilizations on the world's largest land mass except for the westernmost one. The Greeks determined what Asia was back when they had no idea what Asia really was. We're probably a thousand years overdue for a new perspective on civilizational balance.
    1
  1801. Whichever side the military goes with will win. The military will go with whichever side did not attack the government.
    1
  1802.  @disillusionedrightest7313  Those mass-defecting will not have control of the hardware. Nor will they be nearly as well organized. Soldiers will obey orders, and sailors even more so because they're stuck on that ship and can't run away very easily. They may sympathize with one side or the other, but their not going to spontaneously start shooting their platoon members.
    1
  1803. I'm not sure all hypocrisies are inappropriate. Acceptability is a complicated recipe with ingredients like consent, history, social trends and power dynamics. Because of this the rule of thumb in comedy has always been that you can make fun of your own only. Maybe that's changing though, who knows?
    1
  1804.  Christopher Meisner  You're confusing the Shandong with the Liaoning.
    1
  1805. @Lauren Kent You ask a lot of a true believer.
    1
  1806. There is no territorial integrity of Taiwan, it's part of China. China's territorial disputes with Japan, India, the Philippines and Vietnam and Indonesia are just that—disputed.
    1
  1807.  @arbs3ry  I think you misinterpreted me. My point was that it is smart to see something that works and replicate it. My second point is that when China does this, those that don't like China call it stealing.
    1
  1808. You think Russia will switch sides in the middle of the war? I don't get the analogy.
    1
  1809. "…unpredictable", how diplomatic?
    1
  1810. This channel hates China and always has. It regularly speculates about its imminent collapse.
    1
  1811.  @HailAzathoth  While it is true that nothing lasts forever, most of human history has been ruled by despots, and by most I mean almost all.
    1
  1812. Cenk, for all his boistrousness and hyperbole, was one of the first on the left to say that Trump was going to win. I didn't believe him because I didn't think the electorate was that stupid. I don't think Trump is going to be impeached and I'm worried he might win a second term. But then again, Cenk's track record is better than mine at this point.
    1
  1813. He was saying it before election day and I was thinking that he couldn't be serious.
    1
  1814. I don't think he was anti-China but the questioners sure were.
    1
  1815. What are you smoking?
    1
  1816. If the Dalai Lama gave a damn about the people of Tibet, most of whom are still in Tibet, then he would "reincarnate" in Tibet so that they can have their spiritual leader back home in the Potala Palace. This Lobsang Sangay is either deliberately misinforming, or he doesn't know anything about the history of the succession.
    1
  1817. "Can the United States defend Taiwan?" I haven't studied the 18 consecutive war games teasing out that scenario to know whether or not they've gamed for a total war scenario where all American assets are in place when hostilities start. I suspect that's not the case. Could that happen? It would have to be a coordinated effort between the U.S. military and the government of Taiwan, getting everything placed as independence is declared. What then? Assuming China takes the bait, something which I doubt would occur, my understanding is that the United States has about a two-to-one advantage in aircraft in the kind of battle (amphibious assault) where air superiority is one of the most critical factors. If China launched its amphibious attack prior to achieving air superiority, they probably would fail. Could China then goad the United States into fighting over the Taiwan straits without launching the amphibious assault? If so the Chinese could slowly grind down the U.S. air forces with a combination of air assets and land based missile artillery. With restraint, however, the United States might be able to hang the threat of air superiority over a potential landing attempt for some time. Of course China could pulverize Taiwan's airfields, ports and other military assets the whole time. And if a carrier were ever sunk, it would be really difficult for the U.S. to show restraint. Then again, where would China's navy hide during all of this? I don't think China is going to attack Taiwan until they know they will likely win, regardless of whether or not Taiwan declares independence. I do think that the ferocity with which they eventually do attack and take Taiwan will depend in part on how much crow they had to eat in the years leading up to the attack. And for this reason I still think it is overwhelmingly in Taiwan's interest (not to mention China's and the United States' interest) to negotiate a peaceful return where Taiwan negotiates to preserve the things they find most dear in their current system while pledging to be a loyal province within the PRC. But who's going to listen to me?
    1
  1818. Not nearly as many as they take.
    1
  1819. You're probably right, but it doesn't mean they won't wait.
    1
  1820.  @kylenelson2477  Turkey hasn't been attacked.
    1
  1821. A2AD
    1
  1822.  @RichardYLoh  Convicted doesn't necessarily mean proven. Hopefully if they were convicted it is because China at least strongly believes them to be spies. One hopes they weren't just innocent hostages picked up by a cynical regime looking for bargaining chips as so many are wont to suggest.
    1