[Negotiator]

Also mistrusting Western Media just for it being Western Media is nonsense, they are usually more principled and unbiased compared to others.

WTF ?

Western media is owned by billionaires and shows an extremely limited range of opinions.

And anyone who doesnt report what the billionaires want to hear loses their job.

In the USA theres like three media companies that own like all of mainstream media.

Here in Germany its like six families which basically own all mainstream media.

I hear similar things from the UK, too.

As a german its almost shocking to listen to swiss and austrian media because they are so drastically more varied than german ones.

[JohnRawls]

WTF ?

Western media is owned by billionaires and shows an extremely limited range of opinions.

And anyone who doesnt report what the billionaires want to hear loses their job.

In the USA theres like three media companies that own like all of mainstream media.

Here in Germany its like six families which basically own all mainstream media.

I hear similar things from the UK, too.

As a german its almost shocking to listen to swiss and austrian media because they are so drastically more varied than german ones.

Yes, so? In the West, there are many different media that might be a bit more left or right or neutral leaning. It doesn't matter which side it leans to. The difference is that it can report while in less democratic states the media can't report anything bad about the state or its leaders unless it is authorised. That is the main difference. Even if one media in the West will try to spin something bad about somebody in a good light then others will just laugh at their expense and report it anyways. If somebody will try to report something negative about Putin in Russia then they go to jail or get killed straight away. Notice the difference.

[Rancid]

A good way to get unbiased news is to read about geopolitical events from business news sites. This is because the business news sites are incentivized to give out as accurate as possible information. Otherwise the readers (investors, executives, entrepreneurs, etc) of these news outlets will go else where for more accurate news. Becoming an echo chamber like New Max or Fox would hurt their readership.

[Deutschmania]

Vietnam has been trying to get friendly for a long time, 15 or 20 years. Thank China for that.

We are now getting friendlier with Vietnam, again, because of China. We are trying to put together a Pacific alliance to oppose Chinese expansion.

Sometime, maybe 20 years ago, Vietnam said we could have either of the naval bases back, that we had during our conflict with Vietnam. I bet the offer is still open, strategically, it makes sense.

The latter video in my latest post in this thread addresses this matter . But here is a more extensively in depth coverage , and commentary on where Vietnam stands in relation to both the PRC and the USA respectively .

[Sherlock Holmes]

The United States has been and still is, very provocative when it comes to Taiwan. If the situation was reversed and China was continually working to send more weapons and defensive systems to say Cuba, what would the US do? sit and watch?

Every step taken by the United States increases tension, it is always ready to escalate and push and provoke.

[late]

The United States has been and still is, very provocative when it comes to Taiwan. If the situation was reversed and China was continually working to send more weapons and defensive systems to say Cuba, what would the US do? sit and watch?

Every step taken by the United States increases tension, it is always ready to escalate and push and provoke.

That's goofy.

China has been aggressive for years, and under Xi became even more aggressive (although that may have recently changed). India, Vietnam, Indonesia and Japan have all had difficulties.

Biden changed our policy towards Taiwan, saying we would defend it. At first, I thought that was a mistake. I've changed my mind. Taiwan produces a LOT of chips, the global economy would take a hit of they went offline.

"The Biden administration has found a receptive ear in Asian capitals for pushing back on China’s territorial expansion. It is getting increased buy-in for the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue from Japan, as well as from long-wary partners India and Australia, which recently began military exercises together again after a long pause. And the new team is trying to make strides with Japan and South Korea by burying the hatchet on negotiations over the cost of hosting U.S. troops there."

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/26/bi ... sian-nato/

[Skynet]

@Fasces The Emperor's word is law, democratic politicians constantly lie.

When an autoritharian ruler issues threats then it is far more serious then an US president words.

[Fasces]

The last time US surrounded any country in a similar way to what China is doing is basically Cuba during the Cuban missile crysis.

China has been aggressive for years,

Whats funny is that these same posters will talk about "lack of Chinese military experience" two sentences later without batting an eye.

If China is an aggressive state, I hate to see how western foreign policy would be described.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Yes, so? In the West, there are many different media that might be a bit more left or right or neutral leaning. It doesn't matter which side it leans to. The difference is that it can report while in less democratic states the media can't report anything bad about the state or its leaders unless it is authorised. That is the main difference. Even if one media in the West will try to spin something bad about somebody in a good light then others will just laugh at their expense and report it anyways. If somebody will try to report something negative about Putin in Russia then they go to jail or get killed straight away. Notice the difference.

I'd like to suggest you grab a copy of Manufacturing Consent, a scientific analysis of the US media. Key findings include things like the media tend to support government's position with respect to foreign relations (countries that are an "enemy" of the US get covered differently to countries that are "friends" of the US).

A good current example is Russia and Israel, the former is a US "enemy" and the latter a "friend" and the media reports on them from that perspective, anything Russia does is aggression whereas with Israel its self defense. Both Fox and Newsmax cover Israel/Gaza more or less the same as MSNBC for example, watch "Morning Joe" where Joe routinely rants about antisemitism and Israel's need to defend itself, pretty much the same as Fox/Newsmak.

The press and TV news are corporations and their business model is to sell audiences to advertisers (also corporations), that's what they do.

Definitely an instructive book.

[JohnRawls]

Whats funny is that these same posters will talk about "lack of Chinese military experience" two sentences later without batting an eye.

If China is an aggressive state, I hate to see how western foreign policy would be described.

Stop weaseling out of it. Bases are bases, its not a military blockade in preparation of invasion that China does 3 times a year like China announced along with the announcement that the invasion is in the works if Taiwan twitches or "declares independence" or whatever.

[JohnRawls]

I'd like to suggest you grab a copy of Manufacturing Consent, a scientific analysis of the US media. Key findings include things like the media tend to support government's position with respect to foreign relations (countries that are an "enemy" of the US get covered differently to countries that are "friends" of the US).

A good current example is Russia and Israel, the former is a US "enemy" and the latter a "friend" and the media reports on them from that perspective, anything Russia does is aggression whereas with Israel its self defense.

The press and TV news are corporations and their business model is to sell audiences to advertisers (also corporations), that's what they do.

Definitely an instructive book.

I have probably read most of the books that you will try to name to me including manufacturing consent by Chomsky co-autorship.

How about you read Why Nations Fail by Robinson and Acemoglu. You can also read Spin Dictators by Trizman/Guriev. Along with Kotkins yet unfinished fully works about Stalin.

[Fasces]

There was no military blockade of Taiwan during the war games.

Who's ships do get illegally boarded in international waters and taken by the US Navy, though? All those innocuous bases didn't look so innocuous to the Suez Rajan.

We need to stop the charade of painting China as some unique evil in this world. The only thing it is unique in is its ability to pose a threat to US hegemony in the Pacific. Why any single nation has a right to hegemony over a region is beyond me, but this is the world and style of politics the US chose to create. Can't hate the player but not the game.

[late]

If China is an aggressive state, I hate to see how western foreign policy would be described.

[Sherlock Holmes]

That's goofy.

China has been aggressive for years, and under Xi became even more aggressive (although that may have recently changed). India, Vietnam, Indonesia and Japan have all had difficulties.

Biden changed our policy towards Taiwan, saying we would defend it. At first, I thought that was a mistake. I've changed my mind. Taiwan produces a LOT of chips, the global economy would take a hit of they went offline.

"The Biden administration has found a receptive ear in Asian capitals for pushing back on China’s territorial expansion. It is getting increased buy-in for the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue from Japan, as well as from long-wary partners India and Australia, which recently began military exercises together again after a long pause. And the new team is trying to make strides with Japan and South Korea by burying the hatchet on negotiations over the cost of hosting U.S. troops there."

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/26/bi ... sian-nato/

The West, primarily the United States has carpet bombed China's neighbors since WW2. It has bombed Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia for example. The tonnage of bombs dropped on Laos for example (a country the size of Colorado) is about two million tons, making it the most bombed country in history per capita.

This amount dropped is equivalent to a B52 load of bombs being dropped every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day for nine years.

Today children and adults regularly lose limbs/eyesight or even die because of these unexploded cluster bombs (estimated as 30% of that 2 million tons) being scattered all over the land.

North Korea was carpet bombed, targets included dams, roads, power stations, some 90% of the power generation for the country was destroyed (this is precisely the kind of thing Russia hasn't done in Ukraine and if it did we can predict what the US would accuse it of).

Laos was even done covertly, even congress were unaware, so if the United States can do all that and more to China's neighbors, then its very silly to accuse China of being "aggressive" when it reacts to ongoing US provocation and meddling in the region.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I have probably read most of the books that you will try to name to me including manufacturing consent by Chomsky co-autorship.

How about you read Why Nations Fail by Robinson and Acemoglu. You can also read Spin Dictators by Trizman/Guriev. Along with Kotkins yet unfinished fully works about Stalin.

So do you refute or accept the findings in Manufacturing Consent?

[Fasces]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcVSgYz5SJ8

I'm not going to tell you where, but I promise you that there is, somewhere in this 24 hour long video, an insightful 30 seconds that absolutely demolishes whatever the point of your three hour podcast is.

If I had to guess, given that the guest is a dyed in the wool product of the US military, is that her point will reflect the Western perspective: "We don't want war but must prepare for the possibility of a war; when other nations do the same, however, it is because they truly want war and are evil murdering bastards and we're justified to bomb them into the stone age."

China doesn't want a war over Taiwan anymore than the Taiwanese do, and both sides of the strait live in fear of some dumbass redneck in DC sponsoring a unilateral recognition of Taiwanese independence that forces them into it.

[late]

China doesn't want a war over Taiwan anymore than the Taiwanese do

Somebody hasn't been paying attention.

"Many in Washington are pointing to last week’s meeting between President Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping as a sign that the two great powers are growing closer. But on the most important issue in the relationship — Taiwan — Washington and Beijing are moving further apart. Xi’s rhetoric indicates he’s getting impatient with the status quo — and his actions are even more worrisome.

“This is a significant moving of the goal posts, because [Beijing] is now saying that the relationship with China is predicated on the U.S. supporting the Chinese takeover of Taiwan,” said Pottinger. “Xi is saying, ‘I’m not going to stand for the Taiwan status quo much longer, and you, America, are in our way.’”

Yet these hopeful developments mask a grim reality: Xi is telling the world through both words and actions that he intends to take over Taiwan one way or another — and everyone else should either actively help or just accept it."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/11/21/xi-biden-china-taiwan-tension-growing/

[Sherlock Holmes]

Somebody hasn't been paying attention.

"Many in Washington are pointing to last week’s meeting between President Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping as a sign that the two great powers are growing closer. But on the most important issue in the relationship — Taiwan — Washington and Beijing are moving further apart. Xi’s rhetoric indicates he’s getting impatient with the status quo — and his actions are even more worrisome.

“This is a significant moving of the goal posts, because [Beijing] is now saying that the relationship with China is predicated on the U.S. supporting the Chinese takeover of Taiwan,” said Pottinger. “Xi is saying, ‘I’m not going to stand for the Taiwan status quo much longer, and you, America, are in our way.’”

Yet these hopeful developments mask a grim reality: Xi is telling the world through both words and actions that he intends to take over Taiwan one way or another — and everyone else should either actively help or just accept it."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/11/21/xi-biden-china-taiwan-tension-growing/

From Democracy Now - April 2023

And while the United States sometimes talks about a rule-based order, the fact of the matter is that the U.S. grand strategy, if we can use that term of the grand strategists of the U.S. state — see our grand strategy in the United States as being dominance. And I often refer to an article that I think is very clear, succinct and revealing by a former colleague of mine at Harvard University, Robert Blackwill, an esteemed ambassador of the United States, who wrote in 2015 — and I’ll quote from the article — “Since its founding, the United States has consistently pursued a grand strategy focused on acquiring and maintaining preeminent power over various rivals, first on the North American continent, then in the Western Hemisphere, and finally globally.”

and

I’ll give you an example. The U.S. was the creator of the World Bank. But now the U.S. Congress won’t put new money into the World Bank. And because of that, the World Bank is actually a quite small institution. It’s got a big name, but it’s a quite small institution in the financial scheme of things. The U.S. won’t put more money in. The Congress says, “No. Why should we waste our money internationally?” and so forth, and you get a lot of hubbub about that. So, China and the rest of the BRICS say, “OK, we’ll make our own development bank,” and they established the New Development Bank, or sometimes called the BRICS bank, based in Shanghai.

and

President Lula uttered, in a few words, the core of this issue, that our — most of our media dare not explain to the American people, and that is the expansion of NATO. This is a war fundamentally about the U.S. attempt to expand a U.S. military alliance to Ukraine and to Georgia. Georgia is a country in the Caucasus, also on the Black Sea. The U.S. strategy, going back decades, has been to surround Russia in the Black Sea, with Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey and Georgia, all NATO members, surrounding Russia and its naval fleet in the Black Sea, with a naval fleet that has been the Black Sea naval fleet of Russia since 1783. Russia has said, “This is our red line.” And it has said that for decades. And it said this clearly in 2007, before George W. Bush Jr. had the — I’ll call it the harebrained idea to announce in 2008, and force NATO to announce, that Ukraine will be a member of NATO.

And this is what President Lula was saying and what President Xi Jinping of China has been saying: We can’t have a war that is essentially a proxy war between Russia and the United States over the expansion of the U.S. military alliance right up to a 1,200-kilometer and more border with Russia, which Russia views — and I would say understandably views — as a fundamental national security threat to Russia. Keep some space. Keep some distance. That’s President Lula’s meaning. That’s what China means when it says in its peace plan, “We want a peace plan that respects the security interests of all parties.” What that is is code word for saying, “Make peace. End the war. But don’t expand NATO right up to the border.”

[Fasces]

Somebody hasn't been paying attention.

US military-industrialists say the threat is getting worse, and that they need more money! More at 11.

“This is a significant moving of the goal posts, because [Beijing] is now saying that the relationship with China is predicated on the U.S. supporting the Chinese takeover of Taiwan,” said Pottinger. “Xi is saying, ‘I’m not going to stand for the Taiwan status quo much longer, and you, America, are in our way.’”

Matthew Forbes Pottinger (born 1973) is an American former journalist and U.S. Marine Corps officer who served as the United States deputy national security advisor from September 22, 2019 to January 7, 2021.[2] Previously Asia director on the National Security Council since 2017, his tenure was unusual among senior aides serving under President Trump for its length, given an administration marked by high turnover.[3] Pottinger worked to develop the Trump administration's policies towards China.[4][5]

Pottinger resigned in the afternoon of January 6, in response to the 2021 United States Capitol attack. He left the White House the following morning.[6]

Pottinger currently serves as Chairman of the China Program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD).[7]

The Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) is non-profit neoconservative[1][2][3] think tank and (since 2019) a registered lobbying organization based in Washington, D.C., United States. FDD was founded shortly after the September 11 attacks in 2001.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundatio ... es#Funding

[Rancid]

I remember just a few years ago folk saying that an invasion of Taiwan would happen in a few years. Are we there yet, or is it more sabre rattling?