3 ms·

This is news to no one except Americans. But they are finally waking up, at least.

ok123456 2y ago
They'll respond by having their politicians (both sides) ban or add 100%+ tariffs on superior Chinese goods. The whole new Cold War narrative the natsec state in the US has adopted about China is not moored in reality. The realpolitik is that neither side of the strait wants a significant disruption in commerce. Both sides should figure out a way to practice detente and reduce militarism. The US should do this in good faith.
- bdcravens 2y ago
  Even those politicians pick but a few products to do so. It's all theater. There's zero chance of the US succeeding in an all out trade war.
- reducesuffering 2y ago
  This assumes that China will make a good faith effort not to invade Taiwan sometimes 2028+. Current geopol intel is that they fully intend to without immense US deterrence. Right now, you're more of the post-2014 invasion of Crimea camp, "let's not act too rash about helping Ukraine against Russia, hopefully they won't do anything more." From someone who predicted the invasion of Ukraine: https://www.amazon.com/World-Brink-America-Twenty-First-Century/dp/1541704096 https://www.amazon.com/World-Brink-America-Twenty-First-Cent...
  - ok123456 2y ago
    The author of that book is part of the Silverado Policy Accelerator, a natsec state think tank. Ukraine is a different affair. The CIA funded political parties during the Euromaidan/Automaidan, which resulted in internal conflict that led to the current state of affairs. The only reason they could predict it was that it was their goal.
    - KK7NIL 2y ago
      Right, and the KGB was an innocent party in Ukrainian politics until the evil CIA forced their hand. /s You talk about CIA operations during the Euromaidan, but forget the elephant in the room that is objectively true: the Euromaidan was a response to a Russian controlled Ukrainian president betraying his people who were expecting closer ties with the EU and instead doing a deal with Russia last minute.
      - ok123456 2y ago
        Euromaidan was a response to the old regime being corrupt and collapsing. The only allegiance was to self enrichment.
        KK7NIL 2y ago
        Sure, that's why they named it Euromaidan and flew EU flags, because it was totally unrelated to the people's will to be closer to Europe. /s It is true that it was a revolt against a corrupt regime, but it's also true that this regime was openly pro-Russian and Russian backed, against the will of its people. You again have a big ol' blindspot for Russian corruption and meddling in Ukraine. You've made up your mind a long time ago and arguing with you is useless, you're just crafting a narrative that confirms your faith.
    - aguaviva 2y ago
      which resulted in internal conflict that led to the current state of affairs. The "current state of affairs" is due entirely to Putin's conscious decision to invade, starting in 2014, in the total absence of any meaningful threat to Russia's security. Not due to anything happening inside Ukraine, or anything the US supposedly did or did not do there.
      - ok123456 2y ago
        There is history before 2022.
  - ysofunny 2y ago
    china is not know for invading
    - reducesuffering 2y ago
      Tibet, India, and Vietnam would like a word.
      - defrost 2y ago
        China's imitation of the Monroe Doctrine shows deep respect for traditional US values.
        082349872349872 2y ago
        The parallel is a little rougher if one believes the Monroe Doctrine (1823) had been motivated by the anti-slave-trade resolution (1815) annexed to the Congress of Vienna treaties. (which among other things mentioned "putting an end to a scourge, which has so long desolated Africa, degraded Europe, and afflicted humanity.") https://hhr-atlas.ieg-mainz.de/articles/weller-vienna https://hhr-atlas.ieg-mainz.de/articles/weller-vienna
        defrost 2y ago
        That's an interesting connection that, to be honest, I don't think played a great role in being opposed to further European colonisation and|or influence in the New World. I see it more as the beginnings of US regional Hegemony and notable for two things, how it began and future attitudes to world affairs. In the beginning (from the wikipedia link): Great Britain shared the general objective of the Monroe Doctrine, and even wanted to declare a joint statement to keep other European powers from further colonizing the New World. The British feared their trade with the New World would be harmed if the other European powers further colonized it. In fact, for many years after the doctrine took effect, Britain, through the Royal Navy, was the sole nation enforcing it, the U.S. lacking sufficient naval capability. This is a reality of just how intertwined the actual USofA and the actual Great Britain were, despite that whole little hiccup with "Independence". In real politik the thirteen colonies were business investment startups by British Venture Capitalists who retained contacts, contracts, and business ties after reducing the meddling abilities of that pesky king in finnancial arrangements. The now independent colonies and new independent nation remaind largely Anglophile while the old order saw no conflict of interest in the use of their navy in the defence of mutual interest.

They'll respond by having their politicians (both sides) ban or add 100%+ tariffs on superior Chinese goods. The whole new Cold War narrative the natsec state in the US has adopted about China is not moored in reality. The realpolitik is that neither side of the strait wants a significant disruption in commerce. Both sides should figure out a way to practice detente and reduce militarism. The US should do this in good faith.

bdcravens 2y ago
Even those politicians pick but a few products to do so. It's all theater. There's zero chance of the US succeeding in an all out trade war.
reducesuffering 2y ago
This assumes that China will make a good faith effort not to invade Taiwan sometimes 2028+. Current geopol intel is that they fully intend to without immense US deterrence. Right now, you're more of the post-2014 invasion of Crimea camp, "let's not act too rash about helping Ukraine against Russia, hopefully they won't do anything more." From someone who predicted the invasion of Ukraine: https://www.amazon.com/World-Brink-America-Twenty-First-Century/dp/1541704096 https://www.amazon.com/World-Brink-America-Twenty-First-Cent...
- ok123456 2y ago
  The author of that book is part of the Silverado Policy Accelerator, a natsec state think tank. Ukraine is a different affair. The CIA funded political parties during the Euromaidan/Automaidan, which resulted in internal conflict that led to the current state of affairs. The only reason they could predict it was that it was their goal.
  - KK7NIL 2y ago
    Right, and the KGB was an innocent party in Ukrainian politics until the evil CIA forced their hand. /s You talk about CIA operations during the Euromaidan, but forget the elephant in the room that is objectively true: the Euromaidan was a response to a Russian controlled Ukrainian president betraying his people who were expecting closer ties with the EU and instead doing a deal with Russia last minute.
    - ok123456 2y ago
      Euromaidan was a response to the old regime being corrupt and collapsing. The only allegiance was to self enrichment.
      - KK7NIL 2y ago
        Sure, that's why they named it Euromaidan and flew EU flags, because it was totally unrelated to the people's will to be closer to Europe. /s It is true that it was a revolt against a corrupt regime, but it's also true that this regime was openly pro-Russian and Russian backed, against the will of its people. You again have a big ol' blindspot for Russian corruption and meddling in Ukraine. You've made up your mind a long time ago and arguing with you is useless, you're just crafting a narrative that confirms your faith.
  - aguaviva 2y ago
    which resulted in internal conflict that led to the current state of affairs. The "current state of affairs" is due entirely to Putin's conscious decision to invade, starting in 2014, in the total absence of any meaningful threat to Russia's security. Not due to anything happening inside Ukraine, or anything the US supposedly did or did not do there.
    - ok123456 2y ago
      There is history before 2022.
- ysofunny 2y ago
  china is not know for invading
  - reducesuffering 2y ago
    Tibet, India, and Vietnam would like a word.
    - defrost 2y ago
      China's imitation of the Monroe Doctrine shows deep respect for traditional US values.
      - 082349872349872 2y ago
        The parallel is a little rougher if one believes the Monroe Doctrine (1823) had been motivated by the anti-slave-trade resolution (1815) annexed to the Congress of Vienna treaties. (which among other things mentioned "putting an end to a scourge, which has so long desolated Africa, degraded Europe, and afflicted humanity.") https://hhr-atlas.ieg-mainz.de/articles/weller-vienna https://hhr-atlas.ieg-mainz.de/articles/weller-vienna
        defrost 2y ago
        That's an interesting connection that, to be honest, I don't think played a great role in being opposed to further European colonisation and|or influence in the New World. I see it more as the beginnings of US regional Hegemony and notable for two things, how it began and future attitudes to world affairs. In the beginning (from the wikipedia link): Great Britain shared the general objective of the Monroe Doctrine, and even wanted to declare a joint statement to keep other European powers from further colonizing the New World. The British feared their trade with the New World would be harmed if the other European powers further colonized it. In fact, for many years after the doctrine took effect, Britain, through the Royal Navy, was the sole nation enforcing it, the U.S. lacking sufficient naval capability. This is a reality of just how intertwined the actual USofA and the actual Great Britain were, despite that whole little hiccup with "Independence". In real politik the thirteen colonies were business investment startups by British Venture Capitalists who retained contacts, contracts, and business ties after reducing the meddling abilities of that pesky king in finnancial arrangements. The now independent colonies and new independent nation remaind largely Anglophile while the old order saw no conflict of interest in the use of their navy in the defence of mutual interest.