The new cold war with China

Weird timing.

The Biden Administration has stated that it does not support a potential Taiwanese move for independence

Well, if Lebron James does not support Hong Kong free speech, why would Biden support Taiwan freedom?

If supporting human rights hurts business, then they don't matter.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
So China collected genetic data on every population in the world through prenatal tests. The question is what exactly is it doing with it?

I have no doubt that there is bioweapons research going on here.


FYI the US deep state/MIC has been doing this for decades, focusing on Russia, though I am sure they have also branched onto China.

The United States Air Force’s 59th Medical Wing’s molecular biology branch recently was revealed to have been collecting specifically Russian RNA and synovial (connective) tissue samples, prompting fears in Russia of a possible US directed ethnic-specific bioweapons program.

TeleSUR’s article, “‘Ethnic Bomb’ Feared as US Air Force Confirms Collection of Russian DNA,” would report:

Russia has raised its concerns over attempts by the U.S. military to collect DNA samples from Russian nationals, noting the potential use of such biological samples for the purpose of creating new genetic warfare weaponry.

The U.S. Air Force has sought to calm the Kremlin’s concerns, noting that the samples would only be used for so-called “research” purposes rather than for bioterrorism.

Addressing Russian reports, U.S. Air Education and Training Command spokesperson Captain Beau Downey said that his center randomly selected the Russian people as a source of genetic material in its ongoing research of the musculoskeletal system.

The report would also state that:

However, the usage of Russian tissue samples in the USAF study fed the long-brewing suspicion that the Pentagon is continuing in its hopes to develop an alleged “biological weapon” targeting specifically Russians.

Russian President Vladimir Putin would be quoted as stating:

Do you know that biological material is being collected all over the country, from different ethnic groups and people living in different geographical regions of the Russian Federation? The question is – why is it being done? It’s being done purposefully and professionally.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/colle...-threat-of-ethnic-specific-bioweapons/5620863

OK, so the USAF "randomly" selected Russia as the gene pool for their "research"...

This is from the same crowd that has unleashed potent biowarfare like lyme disease on its own population. Lyme CT, ground zero for that disease and how it got its name, happens to be located directly across from the island where bioweapon research with deer ticks was conducted. Lyme disease infects 300,000 Americans every year, a bigger pandemic than covid affecting healthy younger people (and interestingly enough, ivermectin might also work for lymedisease, though the number of studies for the drug's effectiveness against lyme at this point is more limited than for covid)


The other important aspect here is that other players like 23andme, run by Anne Wojcicki and owned by Google have already built a much bigger genetic pool database than China, and that corporation is very close to another foreign entity, Israel.
 
Australian Poli Sci prof gets banned from Twitter for stating that the Uighur genocide narrative is mostly false:

To be fair, there is a crackdown on freedom of religion in China (against Christians as well as Muslims). The USA doesn't seem concerned about the crackdown on churches though. Of course, the USA has no room to talk anymore when churches were forced to be closed but big supermarkets were allowed to be open. It is hard to know for sure how much is true and I have never been to that region and it is likely that even if I lived there, I would not know. I bet most Chinese people don't know either. China only releases information they want you to know.

China's government doesn't seem to want people to be very religious although they are more tolerant than North Korea. They prefer people to be materialistic because this makes them easier to control (again-the US govt. seems to be the same but is not quite as open about it). It seems they will allow some religion as long as they feel they have control of it. I remember someone told me her teacher said to the class that there is no such thing as God. Can you imagine the uproar that would be caused if a high school teacher in the USA told his class this?


 

Max Roscoe

Pelican
Orthodox Inquirer
Please do not misconstrue this is a justification for opposing Christian proselytizers, but many foreign nations have a well-deserved fear of western "Christians" coming to their country who are actually CIA spies. Remember, that these nations often do not know about Christ, and are just reacting to the threat of a foreigner coming in under the guise of religion to spread turmoil and violence in their country. The leaders of places like North Korea and China are ignorant of Christ, and to them, if they have never heard the true message of Christ, it just means "Oh a CIA thug coming here to spread vagino-anal democracy to our people"

 
Please do not misconstrue this is a justification for opposing Christian proselytizers, but many foreign nations have a well-deserved fear of western "Christians" coming to their country who are actually CIA spies. Remember, that these nations often do not know about Christ, and are just reacting to the threat of a foreigner coming in under the guise of religion to spread turmoil and violence in their country. The leaders of places like North Korea and China are ignorant of Christ, and to them, if they have never heard the true message of Christ, it just means "Oh a CIA thug coming here to spread vagino-anal democracy to our people"

I can understand these concerns and I also can understand their concerns regarding Islam. China has seen what happens when Islam gains a strong foothold in most nations (peaceful Islamic nations exist, but they seem to be in the minority). I guess China doesn't want Xinjiang to turn into another Afghanistan. The USA has no right to have spies in any foreign nation. My belief is that if the USA would not want foreign spies in the USA, they shouldn't have spies in foreign nations. They should respect national sovereignty.

I do agree with China's idea of encouraging Han people to move to Xinjiang. This is a peaceful way to ensure that Xinjiang will not have a successful separatist movement. Using demographics to control all parts of their nation is smart and should not be criticized although I do think people should be allowed to peacefully practice their religion and culture as long as it is not hurting others and they don't force it on others. I know the Soviet Union moved ethnic Russians to central Asian states many years ago and probably for the same reason.

“The hukou reforms are about trying to encourage Han migration to southern Xinjiang, even though it’s not phrased in that way,” said James Leibold, an expert on ethnic relations in China at Australia’s La Trobe University.
“The idea behind that is to encourage more inter-ethnic mingling and hopefully by bringing more Han, the quality and the civilisation of southern Xinjiang will increase.”


 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
E8Cdn0nXoAMhvhF
E8Cdn0lWQAgXEnT
E8Cdn0kXEAAYUdo
 

Arado

Pelican
Gold Member
Another interesting commentary from Pat Buchanan on U.S. interests and will.

Patrick J. Buchanan: For What Will We Go to War With China?

In his final state of the nation speech Monday, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte defended his refusal to confront China over Beijing's seizure and fortification of his country's islets in the South China Sea.

"It will be a massacre if I go and fight a war now," said Duterte. "We are not yet a competent and able enemy of the other side."

Duterte is a realist. He will not challenge China to retrieve his lost territories, as his country would be crushed. But Duterte has a hole card: a U.S. guarantee to fight China, should he stumble into war with China.

Consider. Earlier this month, Secretary of State Antony Blinken assured Manila we would invoke the U.S.-Philippines mutual security pact in the event of Chinese military action against Philippine assets.

"We also reaffirm," said Blinken, "that an armed attack on Philippine armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the South China Sea would invoke U.S. mutual defense commitments under Article IV of the 1951 U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty."

Is this an American war guarantee to fight the People's Republic of China, if the Philippines engage a Chinese warship over one of a disputed half-dozen rocks and reefs in the South China Sea? So it would appear.

Why are we threatening this?

Is who controls Mischief Reef or Scarborough Shoal a matter of such vital U.S. interest as to justify war between us and China?
Tuesday, in Singapore, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin reaffirmed the American commitment to go to war on behalf of the Philippines, should Manila attempt, militarily, to retrieve its stolen property.

Said Austin: "Beijing's claim to the vast majority of the South China Sea has no basis in international law. ... We remain committed to the treaty obligations that we have to Japan in the Senkaku Islands and to the Philippines in the South China Sea."

Austin went on: "Beijing's unwillingness to ... respect the rule of law isn't just occurring on the water. We have also seen aggression against India ... destabilizing military activity and other forms of coercion against the people of Taiwan ... and genocide and crimes against humanity against Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang."

The Defense secretary is publicly accusing China of crimes against its Uyghur population in Xinjiang comparable to those for which the Nazis were hanged at Nuremberg.

Austin has also informed Beijing, yet again, that the U.S. is obligated by a 70-year-old treaty to go to war to defend Japan's claims to the Senkakus, half a dozen rocks Tokyo now occupies and Beijing claims historically belong to China.

The secretary also introduced the matter of Taiwan, with which President Jimmy Carter broke relations and let lapse our mutual security treaty in 1979.

There remains, however, ambiguity on what the U.S. is prepared to do if China moves on Taiwan. Would we fight China for Taiwan's independence, an island President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger said in 1972 was "part of China"?

And if China ignores our protests of its "genocide" and "crimes against humanity" against the Uyghurs, and of its human rights violations in Tibet, and of its crushing of democracy in Hong Kong, what are we prepared to do?
Sanctions? A decoupling of our economies? Confrontation? War?

This is not an argument for threatening war, but for an avoidance of war by providing greater clarity and certitude as to what the U.S. response will be if China ignores our protests and remains on its present course.

Some of us can still recall how President Dwight Eisenhower refused to intervene when Nikita Khrushchev ordered Russian tanks into
Budapest to drown the 1956 Hungarian revolution in blood. Instead, we welcomed Hungarian refugees.
When the Berlin Wall went up in 1961, President John F. Kennedy called up the reserves and went to Berlin to make a famous speech, but did nothing.

"Less profile, more courage!" was the response of Cold War hawks.
But Kennedy was saying, as Eisenhower had said by his inaction in Hungary, that America does not go to war with a great nuclear power such as the Soviet Union over the right of East Germans to flee to West Berlin.
Which brings us back to Taiwan.

In the Shanghai Communique signed by Nixon, Taiwan was conceded to be a "part of China." Are we now going to fight a war to prevent Beijing from bringing the island home to the "embrace of the motherland"?

And if we are prepared to fight, Beijing should not be left in the dark. China ought to know the risks it would be taking.
Cuba is an island, across the Florida Strait, with historic ties to the United States. Taiwan is an island 7,000 miles away, on the other side of the Pacific.

This month, Cubans rose up against the 62-year-old Communist regime fastened upon them by Fidel and Raul Castro.
By what yardstick would we threaten war for the independence of Taiwan but continue to tolerate 60 years of totalitarian repression in Cuba, 90 miles away?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 911
The current military build up in the South China Sea, accompanying hostile rhetoric (mostly Chinese), the Russian-Chinese alliance + US attempts at alliance building are by far the biggest topic in geopolitics. And noone is talking about it due to the domestic deep dive into anti-Christian anti-White authoritarianism.

The following comment was made on a YouTube channel I follow (A. Mercouris). This is speculation of course and could be totally wrong but I'd wanted to get it out here anyway.

"According to russian news outlets the US Administration is preparing a ("Iraq style") report in which they want to blame China for the pandemic. The report is set to be published mid August 2021. Is all of what we are seeing right now in the military space related to that upcoming report? Is the US planning and preparing an assault on China? All US attempts to start conflicts with China, in order to stop the rise of China since Mai 2018 (US starts a trade war with China), have failed so far."

Also a recent good discussion between The Duran and Coach Red Pill on the current situation in the South China Sea. The discussion on China starts at ~38:00

 
Top