>Yes, the media is crying wolf and also saying it won't happen, similar situation as around Ukraine/Russia, and similar to any other type of conflict in the wor

>Yes, the media is crying wolf and also saying it won't happen, similar situation as around Ukraine/Russia, and similar to any other type of conflict in the world. Media organizations thrive on stirring the pot, and will always have scary headlines, especially when there is even a hint of anything approaching a conflict. I'm right there with you in understanding the media's fake news and the somewhat recent move toward yellow journalism. That's not what is happening here. These are top officials, actual agreements, and very real reactions to overthrowing the government of hong kong. It's challenging, but not everyone is fake news and throwing this out by labelling me as exaggeration is wrong. >I'm currently in Europe but live in different places in the world during the year, what about you? Canadian. >I believe that things are uncertain right now, and claiming that you know or that everyone "expects" something to happen to be an exaggeration. Linking a bunch of online newspapers with names like "warblog", "militarytimes" or articles about how Australia now has a deal with the US about nuclear arms, doesn't exactly improve your case. Most newspapers just wants views like everyone else, and they'll write news that makes you click on the headline. It takes careful consideration and weighing different sides of a story to see what's going on. I have provided many differing sources and you excluded all of them on the grounds they are fake news. This is fallacious and won't convince anyone of anything. >I'm asking you to provide evidence for these two claims: Why bother? You will instantly claim the evidence is fake news. >You're saying fabs are being put on fire and/or being hacked by foreign entities, while still not providing any evidence for that happening in practice, essentially spreading conspiracy theories. The statement from akm says "there is no clear prospect for identification of the cause of the fire or for restoration of operation of the plant" and the Reuters article makes no claims regarding the cause of the fire. Now I am a conspiracy theorist. Okay. >It could be related, it could not. Without any sort of evidence-based approach, you have about 0% chance at arriving at the correct conclusion. And while you don't have a clue what's going on, it's better not to spread theories that are not based on facts but instead boils down to "So you think this is just a coincidence huh?!". As a conspiracy theorist who provided many top quality sources that you instantly revoked as fake news. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-sydney-morning-herald/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-sydney-morning-herald/ Left leaning and high factual but I guess they are conspiracy theorists as well. Since I am a conspiracy theorist, I now believe you are a chinese agent.