The new cold war with China

kel

Pelican
Possible sign that Xi and Globohomo are batting for different teams?
There's plenty of fair criticisms one can level at China, the CCP, Xi, etc. But far too many people just kind of cast them as globohomo incarnate.

For decades China was the beneficiary of globohomo: shipping them jobs, giving away tech, and offering them white glove treatment because they hated the western middle class and that their lives of relative comfort and stability made them less amenable to bureaucratic rule. At a certain point, though, China realized that it was big enough to actually throw its weight around. It didn't need to ask for this from globohomo anymore, globohomo was dependent upon them to a large extent and they can continue getting those jobs, tech, and pliant international political treatment by now demanding it, just setting hard terms. I think some influential people are very concerned that their monster is now running amok on its own. Soros himself said the biggest threat to the world is China's Xi.

Too black and white a view of China is dangerous, and it's something people on all ends of the political spectrum fall into.
 

Arado

Pelican
Gold Member
There's plenty of fair criticisms one can level at China, the CCP, Xi, etc. But far too many people just kind of cast them as globohomo incarnate.

For decades China was the beneficiary of globohomo: shipping them jobs, giving away tech, and offering them white glove treatment because they hated the western middle class and that their lives of relative comfort and stability made them less amenable to bureaucratic rule. At a certain point, though, China realized that it was big enough to actually throw its weight around. It didn't need to ask for this from globohomo anymore, globohomo was dependent upon them to a large extent and they can continue getting those jobs, tech, and pliant international political treatment by now demanding it, just setting hard terms. I think some influential people are very concerned that their monster is now running amok on its own. Soros himself said the biggest threat to the world is China's Xi.

Too black and white a view of China is dangerous, and it's something people on all ends of the political spectrum fall into.
Agreed - as I posted here, it's inaccurate to fit China into the globalist/nationalist paradigm.
 

redpillage

Ostrich
Gold Member
Possible sign that Xi and Globohomo are batting for different teams?

This may actually be good news. The Chinese usually have extremely good intel inside the U.S. Xi is a lot smarter than Merkel or Macron. If he's hesitant to stick it to his opponent then he probably knows something that the MSM isn't letting out.

Remember Sun Tzu:
“Ponder and deliberate before you make a move.”
 

Dr Mantis Toboggan

Kingfisher
Gold Member
This may actually be good news. The Chinese usually have extremely good intel inside the U.S. Xi is a lot smarter than Merkel or Macron. If he's hesitant to stick it to his opponent then he probably knows something that the MSM isn't letting out.

Remember Sun Tzu:
“Ponder and deliberate before you make a move.”

Agree with this. 2 possible reasons (which aren't mutually exclusive):

-MSS thinks there's a decent chance Trump will end up getting re-inaugurated, and Xi doesn't see any point in antagonizing him in a needless manner

-Xi realizes his endorsement of Biden's victory would be politically beneficial to Trump

Worth pointing out also that AMLO hasn't congratulated Biden, he probably has good a pulse on what's going on inside the US as any foreign leader.
 

Mr.

Pigeon
This may actually be good news. The Chinese usually have extremely good intel inside the U.S. Xi is a lot smarter than Merkel or Macron. If he's hesitant to stick it to his opponent then he probably knows something that the MSM isn't letting out.

Remember Sun Tzu:
“Ponder and deliberate before you make a move.”

I imagine China, and Russia for that matter, know that Trump is going to win and are buying some bargaining power for the future. Also, any US internal division and chaos is good for them. Regardless, we know that China is a serious and distinct player, not entirely aligned with Globohomo.
 
Several countries concerned over faulty Chinese military equipment

tthh.jpg

Whoops!!! This is going to be bad for business! I suppose when the Chinese use their own homebuilt equipment, they have on-hand the technicians, mechanics and engineers needed to fix/tweak things sufficiently so that they will work properly.

 

Elipe

Woodpecker
Several countries concerned over faulty Chinese military equipment

View attachment 26744

Whoops!!! This is going to be bad for business! I suppose when the Chinese use their own homebuilt equipment, they have on-hand the technicians, mechanics and engineers needed to fix/tweak things sufficiently so that they will work properly.

You're supposed to hide the backdoors, China.
 

Friends Don't Let Friends Become Chinese Billionaires

An article from 2011, which shares a chilling statistic...... I wonder if this is still the case......


dead rich.jpg

"I'm no statistics whiz, but it seems to me that a Chinese billionaire dies every 40 days.

China Daily reported Friday that unnatural deaths have taken the lives of 72 mainland billionaires over the past eight years. (Do the math.)

Which means that if you're one of China's 115 current billionaires, as listed on the 2011 Forbes Billionaires List, you should be more than a little nervous.

Mortality rate notwithstanding, what's more disturbing is how these mega wealthy souls met their demise. According to China Daily, 15 were murdered, 17 committed suicide, seven died from accidents and 19 died from illness. Oh, yes, and 14 were executed. (Welcome to China.)

I don't know about you but I find it somewhat improbable that among such a small population there could be so many "suicides," "accidents" and "death by disease" (the average age of those who died from illness was only 48). I'm only speculating but the homicide toll could really be much higher."

 
Last edited:

Elipe

Woodpecker

Friends Don't Let Friends Become Chinese Billionaires

An article from 2011, which shares a chilling statistic...... I wonder if this is still the case......


View attachment 26778

"I'm no statistics whiz, but it seems to me that a Chinese billionaire dies every 40 days.

China Daily reported Friday that unnatural deaths have taken the lives of 72 mainland billionaires over the past eight years. (Do the math.)

Which means that if you're one of China's 115 current billionaires, as listed on the 2011 Forbes Billionaires List, you should be more than a little nervous.

Mortality rate notwithstanding, what's more disturbing is how these mega wealthy souls met their demise. According to China Daily, 15 were murdered, 17 committed suicide, seven died from accidents and 19 died from illness. Oh, yes, and 14 were executed. (Welcome to China.)

I don't know about you but I find it somewhat improbable that among such a small population there could be so many "suicides," "accidents" and "death by disease" (the average age of those who died from illness was only 48). I'm only speculating but the homicide toll could really be much higher."

That's how you keep Deep States from forming in your own country.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member

China’s military modernisation has pushed Japan to develop its own stealth fighter, analysts say

View attachment 26743



The real story here is that Japan knows that the the F35 is a white elephant lemon. Like many NATO vassal states, they are stuck with that program due to pressure from the US, as are countries like Belgium, the UK, Italy or Canada that would be better off buying Saab Gripens or French Rafales.

Japan was thinking of taking the diplomatic approach of working with Northrop to revive the F23 Black Widow program (which was shelved after the F23 narrowly lost out to the F22), this would provide them with a platform superior to the F35 without upsetting the US MIC.



 

Enigma

Hummingbird
Gold Member
The problem with the "globalist" vs. "nationalist" argument is that people don't actually know what these terms mean.

Globalism isn't some nebulous economic system that loves trannies. Gays and Muslims and multiculturalism aren't agendas, they're tools used to destabilize certain populations and nations.

The actual goal of the "globalists" is one world government ruled by a small number of technocrats.

It's pretty obvious from that perspective how the largest, most openly technocratic government in human history, which is building a railway across half the planet and buying up property/businesses all over the world is a continuation of that agenda.

As for nationalism, the CCP literally took power in China by defeating the Chinese Nationalist Party. They then supported anti-nationalist/anti-royalist coups and purges all over Southeast Asia, including in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia.

Are the CCP more "nationalist" than, say, Macron in France? Sure. But if that's your only standard for "nationalism", the word really has no meaning.

And from that perspective, most of Asia is fairly "nationalist".

But as I've pointed out before, China has completely humiliated and neutered Duterte, who was one of the most outspoken world leaders against the UN, EU, etc. The Vietnamese can't stand China. And how is China's relationship with Modi, who many were hailing as an "anti-globalist" figure?

In other words, "nationalist" China doesn't get along with any of their "nationalist" neighbors. Instead, they exploit and threaten them economically and militarily.

That's not nationalism. That's imperialism.

Even Russia, you'll notice, is not all that openly friendly with China, even when the West is doing everything possible to drive them into each other's arms. And while Russian relations with some of their neighbors, like Belarus and Ukraine, are complicated at times, you don't see nearly the same kind of open parasitism and hostility that you see from the Chinese in Southeast Asia, where they own 75%+ of every single country's economy.

And you definitely don't see the social credit score, genetic modification, and other technocratic, anti-human BS in Russia on the same levels that you do in China. Why hasn't Putin set up "re-education" camps for Muslims in Chechnya, Dagestan, Central Asia, etc.? Is it because Putin is a "weak globalist cuck"? Or is it for another reason?
 

semilla

Pigeon
The real story here is that Japan knows that the the F35 is a white elephant lemon. Like many NATO vassal states, they are stuck with that program due to pressure from the US, as are countries like Belgium, the UK, Italy or Canada that would be better off buying Saab Gripens or French Rafales.

Japan was thinking of taking the diplomatic approach of working with Northrop to revive the F23 Black Widow program (which was shelved after the F23 narrowly lost out to the F22), this would provide them with a platform superior to the F35 without upsetting the US MIC.



I’m curious, why do you feel the F35 is inferior? I don’t know much about these things, but if it the newest version of fighter jet aircraft one would imagine it has improved qualities.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
I’m curious, why do you feel the F35 is inferior? I don’t know much about these things, but if it the newest version of fighter jet aircraft one would imagine it has improved qualities.

The F35 is the poster child of the broken, bloated MIC procurement system. It is the most expensive military program ever, currently at $1.5 trillion and counting. The plane is a flawed design, boxy, slow, underpowered, with poor maneuverability, and possibly the most difficult and expensive fighter jet ever in terms of maintenance cost and flyability. It relies completely on its stealth, so should Russia or China's radar capacity improve abit, the F35 will be made obsolete.


An Australian military analyst put it in more blunt terms, saying that the F35 would be “clubbed like baby seals” in combat... Australia, along with Canada, the UK, Japan and a number of NATO countries have committed to that program. Shades of the F104 Starfighter, played dubbed "the flying coffin", which was also foisted upon NATO vassals and Canada back in the 1960s. WWII Luftwaffe ace Erich Hartmann survived the war but not the Starfighter program, he was canned from West Germany's air force for having objected to that plane being bought by Germany. More independent countries like Switzerland or South Africa purchased instead the Mirage, while countries like W. Germany and Italy ended up with a high rate of pilot casualties with the Starfighter.

One thing that's generally true in airplane design, that's also true of cars, is that planes that look beautiful are generally great. You look at designs like the Spitfire, the Mustang, the Me109, Me262, the Mirage III, the late gen Sukhois, the Tomcat, Eagle, Raptor or Black Widow II - all these planes are gorgeous designs, fierce, slick machines that look like they own the skies and they're going to tear their enemies apart. The F35 is instead a stumpy, boxy machine, kind of like a high-maintenance short fat entitled spoiled daddy's girl that you had to date. The F35 beat out Boeing's F32 bid, which was even worse...




Boeing X32 and Lockheed X35


The F22 Raptor, which was designed purely for air superiority (much like the F15 which it resembles) is a great fighter plane, with superior design, but it has also suffered from the bloated procurement system which pushed its unit cost to more than double its original levels, so as a result the USAF F22 fleet will be less than a third what it was supposed to be.

The USAF fighter program is in bad shape at the moment, rivals from Russia, France or Sweden have lean domestic champions that have been churning out solid designs at a fraction of the cost (SU50PAK, Rafale, Gripen). China's program is a notch below these countries, due to the fact that their air industry is newer, and that they rely more on copying than on developing their own designs, though that will probably change going forward.
 
Last edited:

semilla

Pigeon
The F35 is the poster child of the broken, bloated MIC procurement system. It is the most expensive military program ever, currently at $1.5 trillion and counting. The plane is a flawed design, boxy, slow, underpowered, with poor maneuverability, and possibly the most difficult and expensive fighter jet ever in terms of maintenance cost and flyability. It relies completely on its stealth, so should Russia or China's radar capacity improve abit, the F35 will be made obsolete.


An Australian military analyst put it in more blunt terms, saying that the F35 would be “clubbed like baby seals” in combat... Australia, along with Canada, the UK, Japan and a number of NATO countries have committed to that program. Shades of the F104 Starfighter, played dubbed "the flying coffin", which was also foisted upon NATO vassals and Canada back in the 1960s. WWII Luftwaffe ace Erich Hartmann survived the war but not the Starfighter program, he was canned from West Germany's air force for having objected to that plane being bought by Germany. More independent countries like Switzerland or South Africa purchased instead the Mirage, while countries like W. Germany and Italy ended up with a high rate of pilot casualties with the Starfighter.

One thing that's generally true in airplane design, that's also true of cars, is that planes that look beautiful are generally great. You look at designs like the Spitfire, the Mustang, the Me109, Me262, the Mirage III, the late gen Sukhois, the Tomcat, Eagle, Raptor or Black Widow II - all these planes are gorgeous designs, fierce, slick machines that look like they own the skies and they're going to tear their enemies apart. The F35 is instead a stumpy, boxy machine, kind of like a high-maintenance short fat entitled spoiled daddy's girl that you had to date. The F35 beat out Boeing's F32 bid, which was even worse...




Boeing X32 and Lockheed X35


The F22 Raptor, which was designed purely for air superiority (much like the F15 which it resembles) is a great fighter plane, with superior design, but it has also suffered from the bloated procurement system which pushed its unit cost to more than double its original levels, so as a result the USAF F22 fleet will be less than a third what it was supposed to be.

The USAF fighter program is in bad shape at the moment, rivals from Russia, France or Sweden have lean domestic champions that have been churning out solid designs at a fraction of the cost (SU50PAK, Rafale, Gripen). China's program is a notch below these countries, due to the fact that their air industry is newer, and that they rely more on copying than on developing their own designs, though that will probably change going forward.
Excellent response, thank you for the clarification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 911
Top