Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
October 01, 2021

How AP, Reuters And SCMP Propagandize Their Readers Against China

A typical 'western' anti-China propaganda claim is that China is using its military aggressively. 'Western' news agencies do this on a regular base when they report of Chinese air maneuvers around Taiwan.

This report by the South China Morning Post, based on AP and Reuters items, is a perfect example for that:

25 Chinese warplanes enter Taiwan’s air defence zone

Taiwan’s air force scrambled again on Friday to warn away 25 Chinese aircraft that entered its air defence zone, according to the defence ministry in Taipei.

Taiwan has complained for a year or more of repeated missions by China’s air force, often in the southwestern part of its air defence zone close to the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Islands.

The latest PLA air force mission involved 18 J-16 and four Su-30 fighters plus two nuclear-capable H-6 bombers and an anti-submarine aircraft, the Taiwan ministry said.

It said Taiwan sent combat aircraft to warn away the PLA aircraft, while missile systems were deployed to monitor them.

The Chinese aircraft all flew in an area close to the Pratas, with the two bombers flying closest to the atoll, according to a map that the ministry issued.

I do not believe that China would fly its bombers and jets into Taiwan's "air defense zone" because that is the geographic area where Taiwan would actually shoot to take them down.

So I checked with the news agency reports the SCMP story is based on. AP headlines:

China sends 25 fighter planes toward Taiwan on National Day

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) — China sent 25 fighter jets toward self-ruled Taiwan in a large display of force on China’s National Day Friday.

The People’s Liberation Army flew 18 J-16 fighter jets as well as two H-6 bombers, among other planes. Taiwan deployed air patrol forces in response and tracked the Chinese aircraft on its air defense systems, the island’s Defense Ministry said in a statement.

China has sent planes toward the island it claims as part of its territory on a near daily basis in the last couple of years, stepping up military harassment with drills.

No "air defense zone" there but one extra point for "military harassment". Reuters is less subtle:

China marks national day with mass air incursion near Taiwan

TAIPEI, Oct 1 (Reuters) - Taiwan's air force scrambled again on Friday to warn away 25 Chinese aircraft that entered its air defence zone, the defence ministry in Taipei said, the same day as China marked its national day, the founding of the People's Republic of China.

Chinese-claimed Taiwan has complained for a year or more of repeated missions by China's air force near the democratically governed island, often in the southwestern part of its air defence zone close to the Taiwan-controlled Pratas Islands.

The latest Chinese mission involved 18 J-16 and four Su-30 fighters plus two nuclear-capable H-6 bombers and an anti-submarine aircraft, the Taiwan ministry said.

So the "air defense zone" claims comes from Reuters. It is however 100% fake news. Neither did the Chinese airforce fly into the "air defense zone" of Taiwan nor did Taiwan claim that it did.

Here is the original news item from the Ministry of Defense of Taiwan. The headline and first line say it all:

Air activities in the southwestern ADIZ of R.O.C.

Air activities in the southwestern ADIZ of R.O.C.
...

There is no "air defense zone" (ADZ) in there. Instead there is Taiwan's ADIZ, or "Air Defense Identification Zone", into which Chinese planes 'intruded'.

What is an ADIZ one might ask:

An air defense identification zone (ADIZ) is airspace over land or water in which the identification, location, and control of civil aircraft is performed in the interest of national security. They may extend beyond a country's territory to give the country more time to respond to possibly hostile aircraft. The concept of an ADIZ is not defined in any international treaty and is not regulated by any international body.

Some countries unilateral declare an ADIZ around this or that territory. They ask any plane entering it to identify itself. As ADIZ are unilateral 'pretty please' requests with no binding power they are regularly ignored.

Taiwan's ADIZ is quite rediculous as it covers parts of mainland China:

Taiwan has an ADIZ that covers most of the Taiwan Strait, part of the Chinese province of Fujian, Zhejiang, and Jiangxi and part of the East China Sea and adjacent airspace. Most of the ADIZ of Taiwan is built on its exclusive economic zone. Taiwan's ADIZ was designed and created by the United States Armed Forces (USAF) after World War II.

The Taiwanese Defense Ministry Military News Updates claim that Chinese 'violations' of its ADIZ happen each and every day.

The Reuters fake news piece also says that the Chinese planes flew near to Pratas Island (Dongsha) which China as well as Taiwan both claim as their territory.

In fact mainland China is nearer to Pratas than Taiwan is.

The Twitter account of Taiwan's Defense Ministry just posted this map of the alleged 'violations' which perfectly shows how ridiculous such claims are:


bigger

The AP report is misleading as it implies a special meaning to something that happens regularly. The Reuters piece is obviously fake news as it claims that Taiwan's defense ministry said something which it did not say.  The SCMP deserves to be criticized too as any reporter and editor covering such news should know the difference between an ADZ and an ADIZ and should have recognized that the "air defense zone" claim in the Reuters piece is obviously bollocks.

That said all three fulfill their intended purpose. They propagandize those who read them against China by depicting normal military training of China's armed forces as aggression against its neighbors. 

Posted by b on October 1, 2021 at 16:52 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page

Wars can be waged in multiple ways: culturally, economically, financially, militarily, ... The key element is....? SURPRISE... What has been the trajectory of wars in humanity’s history?

In the last Cold War, the Soviet Union was challenged financially through the oil price. Internally, the Soviet Union wasn’t strong and its budgets got distorted. The Soviet Union sold its oil in the US$ and its budgets got carried away when the oil price peaked. In 1970s, the Financial Empire had penetrated the Soviet Union and started bribing traitors. In 1980s, the Empire worked towards driving the oil prices down to $5 per barrel. The Soviet Union bureaucracy didn’t have good leadership, so couldn’t adapt and respond quickly to its weakened financial situation. It finally caved in and the tragedy happened. Similarly, in 1998 when the oil price declined significantly Russia defaulted. The Empire waged war financially to bring down the Soviet Union. It was helped by Russia’s traitors too.

The Financial Empire is waging a multi front proxy war against China, Russia and the Non-$ Bloc. It has launched information, technological, trade, economic/sanctions, currency, energy,.... wars. However, all this warfare have been anticipated and antidotes prepared. This is the reasoning behind China pursuing autarkic economic policies! Russia is pursuing economic sovereignty too. Iran & Germany now joining them. Empire’s redlines have been defined. The Empire is shooting itself in the foot. The U$A would do better by focusing on Americans and internal development instead of misadventures.

Empire’s ploys will be neutralized and its PIO (Private Imperialist Oligarchy) isolated. They’re out of luck! The best defense is a good offense. No Imperialism & enslavement. “In God We Trust”

How will the Empire be challenged?

Posted by: Max | Oct 2 2021 19:23 utc | 101

perhaps in comments on a different but recent China post here at MoA, someone pointed out that China must consider that the West has shown itself ready to sacrifice millions of lives w/psychopathic indifference, during the coronavirus.

biden slit his own child's throat on the altar of US imperialism and counts his son's death as one of his greatest personal accomplishments.

people should not delude themselves that war cannot happen.

Posted by: rjb1.5 | Oct 2 2021 19:28 utc | 102

Any experienced warfare guy will say the same, the most important element of any war is logistics. And that is the US's main downfall in any war with China. The US does not have the capability to supply the fighting elements with the ammunition, food, repair parts etc that they would require to conduct a war on the other side of the vast Pacific Ocean which covers about one-third of the earth's surface.
And where would those forces be? The Marine Corps plan is to move Marines from one small island to another on small ships, and then have these Marines to place indirect fire on China targets. I don't see anyone volunteering for that ridiculous scenario. But hey, it keeps dollars in the Pentagon budget.
Another problem for the US is that both China and Russia have fielded versions of hypersonic weapons that can travel faster than five times the speed of sound (Mach 5 is about 3,806 mph) and potentially hold U.S. capital and logistical ships at risk. These missiles have a range of up to a thousand miles. The US has no defense against them and aircraft-carrier launched planes don't have sufficient range to rectify the problem.
So it would be a maritime-based war with US major warships not able to get anywhere close to the Asian mainland, which means no war at all.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 2 2021 20:12 utc | 103

With respect to the incredibly simplistic usage of the Peloponnesian wars (i.e. Thucydides Trap), by neorealist international relations scholars, from my PhD dissertation:

The ahistorical, Eurocentric and universalist shortcomings of neorealism with respect to a rising power such as China are evident in analyses such as Allison’s (2017), that rely upon the assumption that the small-scale Peloponnesian wars of more than two millennia ago are applicable to the modern world of superpowers and weapons of mass destruction, with the internal dynamics of each nation deemed to relative irrelevance. Furthermore, both classical realist and neorealist scholars may utilize simplistic readings of Thucydides, an author that may in fact be a highly unreliable narrator (Podoksik 2005). There is a great deal of disagreement among historians about who actually started the Peloponnesian wars; it could have been Athens, Sparta, Corinth or even a combination (Dickins 1911; Tannenbaum 1975; Kagan 2013), and therefore the main lesson to be learnt is the complexity of the real world, even the ancient one. In addition, as Bagby notes (1994, p. 133), “Thucydides thinks that an understanding of the political and cultural differences among city-states before and during the Peloponnesian War is crucial for understanding their behavior”; Sparta and Athens could easily be seen as greater ideological competitors than the Cold War US and Soviet Union.

Allison, G. (2017). Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides's Trap? [kindle version]. Mariner Books.

Bagby, L. M. L. (1994). The Use and Abuse of Thucydides in International Relations, International Organization 48(1), 131- 153

Dickins, G. (1911). The True Cause of the Peloponnesian War. The Classical Quarterly 5(4): 238–248.

Kagan, D. (2013). The Outbreak of the Peloponnesian War. [kindle edition]. Cornell University Press.

Podoksik, E. (2005). JUSTICE, POWER AND ATHENIAN IMPERIALISM: AN IDEOLOGICAL MOMENT IN THUCYDIDES' "HISTORY". History of Political Thought 26(1), 21-41.

Tannenbaum, R. F. (1975). Who Started the Peloponnesian War? Arion: A Journal of Humanities and the Classics 2(4), 533–546.

Posted by: Roger | Oct 2 2021 20:23 utc | 104

Posted by: Roger | Oct 2 2021 20:23 utc | 104

You got a PhD for that? Self-evidently Thucydides was simplistic by modern standards. Actually I admire him for having got as far as he did.

Many of ancient Greek ideas were based on earlier ideas frome the Near East, and merely advanced them. But no-one will admit that.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 2 2021 20:59 utc | 106

Wow! The things people get PhDs for these days!

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 2 2021 21:18 utc | 107

Laguerre, William Gruff - I was expecting such a reaction when I posted it :-)! There was another 100,000 words involved.

Posted by: Roger | Oct 2 2021 21:31 utc | 108

"...the most important element of any war is logistics."

Absolutely so. Fancy weapons and great troop morale get you nowhere if you cannot get them to the theater of operations along with lunch. The notion that the US can land ground forces on the Chinese mainland to occupy and annex China is absurd. That's the "Risk" board game version of geopolitics.

But the empire doesn't need to annex China. The empire just needs to economically set China back a couple decades. There is a faction within the empire who believe this is doable in part with a naval blockade.

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 2 2021 21:42 utc | 109

@Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 2 2021 20:59 utc | 106

It would not surprise me at all, there were huge Near Eastern empires that pre-dated and paralleled the relatively small Athenian city states (e.g. the Achaemenid Empire). Further east of course there was a China fighting wars and building societies on a scale unimaginable by the Greeks (the Warring States period with a combined population of about 45 million).

But many of our Anglo-US IR scholars seem to have a problem imagining anything important outside the Greco-Roman lineage that their societies supposedly stem from, at least the generations that still dominate US/UK policy making. I watched an interview with Graham Allison where he professed no knowledge of Chinese history, stating that the lessons of Thucydides were timeless and universal. I don't have a problem with Thucydides, its the simplistic and ideological usage of him by todays scholars who should know better.

Posted by: Roger | Oct 2 2021 21:48 utc | 110

@Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 2 2021 21:42 utc | 109

Gabriel Collins did a very good report for the US Naval War College Review on the practicality of a maritime oil blockade of China - even in 2018 he was not too optimistic, "A Maritime Oil Blockade Against China—Tactically Tempting but Strategically Flawed". China would also have access to Russia, Central Asia, ASEAN etc. for food and other supplies, and would have inevitably created large stockpiles before any conflict.

https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1735&context=nwc-review

"The scenarios also highlight the reality that, within historically realistic response parameters, China very feasibly could adapt to conflict conditions and withstand a blockade for a longer period than an outside power realistically could sustain the operation. At the most fundamental level, a blockader would find itself increasingly isolated on the world stage, which would complicate its ability politically, economically, and militarily to continue its campaign."

"The significant long-term reduction in revenue to major oil and commodity exporters as a result of decreasing oil-demand volumes and depressed prices could exert profound internal political effects and trigger new conflicts and in- flame existing ones across the Middle East and parts of Africa. Sufficiently serious regional contingencies could divert U.S. military resources from the Asian theater, particularly if the United States found itself politically and diplomatically isolated on the world stage. This could undermine the sustainability of a distant energy blockade against China."


Posted by: Roger | Oct 2 2021 22:00 utc | 111

Don Bacon @Oct2 20:12 #103: conduct a war on the other side of the vast Pacific Ocean

You're forgetting that USA has bases in Japan, South Korea, Guam, Australia, etc.?

Also, I think that there's some question about what kind of war would be fought. IMO it's highly unlikely that USA invades China or that China invades other countries. So it becomes a war of attrition/blockade.

=
Roger @Oct2 20:23 #104: simplistic usage of the Peloponnesian wars

Yeah, it's simplistic. But it's also intuitively appealing.

Please tell us what is wrong with this simple version of the 'trap': an established power will generally try to prevent a rising power to become so powerful that it could challenge the established power.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 2 2021 22:16 utc | 112

tough crowd, lol..

Posted by: james | Oct 2 2021 23:00 utc | 113

I dont know where to ask so i will start here:
Anybody knows of a translation of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goMLGMxJ9IM&t=350s
I do not understand a word but I am deeply in love :)


Posted by: Den Lille Abe | Oct 2 2021 23:00 utc | 114

@Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 2 2021 22:16 utc | 112

Because its not supported even by the history of the Peloponnesian Wars in any straight-forward way, as well as being a very dangerous simplistic heuristic for policy makers.

A good example is the relationship of the UK and France to Germany (and Italy) and the USSR prior to WW2. Their greatest concern was not the rising power of Germany, but the ideological threat of communism to the elite interests (i.e. not the countries per se but specifically to their elites). They refused to sign a tripartite pact with the USSR to contain Germany (as per the Franco-Russian alliance prior to WW1, of course with a non-communist Russia). Churchill was quite an admirer of Mussolini and was an adamant anti-communist (as well as a racist and generally shared the elite hatred of the "masses"). Given simple geography, Germany was a much greater direct threat to French and British interests. The WW1 settlement, together with the Poland-USSR war had placed the boundaries of the USSR far away from Western Europe.

They would have been very happy for Germany to go to war with the USSR and destroy the communists (as a certain Harry S. Truman opined about in the US Senate in 1941), unhindered by any military action by them. The "phoney war" after the invasion of Poland is strange given the weakness of the German Western front, but matches the hope that Germany would strike eastwards to destroy the USSR. The German-USSR pact (which kept the German-Russian front line much farther away from Moscow, a fact critical to the USSR defeat of Germany) removed that possibility in the short-term, redirecting Germany against France. Full aid and support to the USSR only really stepped up after Stalingrad, when it was obvious that the USSR may actually defeat Germany. Both in WW1 and WW2, the US elites had to overcome very significant domestic opposition to enter the war (especially in WW1), and there were significant supporters of Germany (e.g. Henry Ford) on ideological grounds.

Kolko, G. (1990). The Politics of War. Pantheon Books, is one of the best coverages of this period - with the detailed back and forth between the powers.

In recent times it would have been a neorealist "no brainer" for the US to make the limited concessions necessary to Russia to bring it into the Western camp prior to 2010, but a mixture of anger at the "loss" of Russia to their subjugation and profiteering and sheer hubris stopped them doing that. In fact they did the opposite, providing China with a critical alliance with its Northern neighbour who possesses much of the resources and military technology it needs and provides extensive geoeconomics and political aid throughout Central Asia and the Middle East. Even now, the US cannot do what an "obvious" view would deem a "duh".

The real world is not open to simplistic theories. The US was fine with a rising China as long as it was a capitalist one and opened up its finance to the wealth making of the US and Western elites. The problem with China is that did not "liberalize" and provides a successful alternative model to Western neoliberalism which is focused on the national interest (as against the elite capitalist interest) and tends to favour the welfare of the overall population.

Posted by: Roger | Oct 2 2021 23:11 utc | 115

China doesn't need to invade Taiwan, the two entities are already close enough on everything that counts, trade, inward investments, tourism, cultural exchanges, the lot.

China's power is anchored in making things and selling them on every world market, by the turn of the century around a third of her GDP was coupled with exports, by 2019 this ratio was down to 15%, it must have gone up during the months of covid as the Chinese economy was the only one resuming working.

For the Americans to disrupt the sea lines from the Chinese ports would be counterproductive unless they were to find a substitute for the stuff manufactured in China for the US market, some 80% of US imports from China are on behalf of US brand names, Apple is but the one most visible example.

Despite of the warmongering China still enjoys the the Permanent Normal Trade Relations Partner status (PNTR) google for what the partner status offers, China was granted it by Bush at the time of her joining WTO. If the Americans were serious about disrupting China's trade hence the country's economy they would withdraw the PNTR status, they haven't, which tells you they are stuck until they figure where else to source what comes from China.


Posted by: Baron | Oct 2 2021 23:15 utc | 116

"an established power will generally try to prevent a rising power to become so powerful that it could challenge the established power."

I think this is a good description of the Thucydides Trap. I don't believe the theory should be taken any more literal then that and it isn't supposed to be some deterministic scientific comment were causality is linear an absolute. It also doesn't require a shooting war to hold true.

Given the current situation, and The Empire's multi-pronged attempt to harm China, I think it is fair to say the Thucydides Trap has already been sprung.

Having said that, I don't think a shooting war is inevitable. I also think a blockade isn't likely as that would almost absolutely lead to a shooting war.

People forget China has a lot of oil and other resources. Enough oil and gas to last five years without imports. They are also well connected to Russia, Central Asia and South East Asia, so even a successful naval blockade could be gotten around.

I disagree China wouldn't invade if forced into this position. They'd take Taiwan quickly and it would be impossible to prevent them from taking South Korea, which would lead to many thousand American POW's and KIA. They'd also have total control of the areas within the first Island chain which would provide a lot of strategic avenues.

Not to mention a blockade wouldn't slow down their industrial production, instead it would push their industry into war-time hyper production giving China unlimited missiles to strike at everything from Gaum on in.

That isn't to say The Desperate Empire might not try a blockade or find a way to stumble into a stupid war...it is to say it would turn out very badly for The Empire and hasten their demise rather then slow down China's rise.

Posted by: Haassaan | Oct 2 2021 23:19 utc | 117

The REAL war is already being fought, it's the class war, and the 1% are winning....

Posted by: vetinLA | Oct 2 2021 23:23 utc | 118

In fact, in case of a war between the US and China the GIs would even lack the pants to shit into as they are manufactured in China.

Posted by: aquadraht | Oct 2 2021 23:38 utc | 119

Roger @Oct2 23:11 #114

not supported ... in any straight-forward way ...

It seems that you are saying that it is supported but not inevitable. Even with that, I disagree. I think it's the nature of humans and human governance to view a rising power as a threat. And I don't think the Empire Managers are 'enlightened' enough (as a group) to tamp down that instinctual reflex. All indications are that the 'trap' has already been sprung.

My description of the 'trap' didn't include war. But even if war is avoided, Cold War II is likely to see brinkmanship like Cold War I's Cuban Missile Crisis.

A good example is ... prior to WW2

Not sure that's such a good example. Rising power Germany had been defeated in WWI. The allies lost the peace by being so cruel in their demands for reparations. Germany's quick rise from the ashes of WWI was a surprise. The established powers were late to recognize the threat and had no time to effectively counter it.

... very dangerous simplistic heuristic for policy makers

It's dangerous only if applied recklessly. And I don't see evidence of that. They didn't, for example, take decisive action when China wasn't playing by their rules, like when China refused to allow foreign firms to control Chinese subsidiaries or when SCO was formed, etc.

The Russia+ China threat has been recognized since at least 2014. And USA has been working to counter it since then. The tensions we see today didn't just happen. Trump got tough on China and initiated a military build-up, among other things.

=
Haassaan @Oct2 23:19 #116

Given the current situation, and The Empire's multi-pronged attempt to harm China, I think it is fair to say the Thucydides Trap has already been sprung.

This is clear to me as well.

Having said that, I don't think a shooting war is inevitable.

Agreed. But I don't think the possibility of a shooting war is remote either.

I also think a blockade isn't likely as that would almost absolutely lead to a shooting war.

I disagree with this. Merely the threat of attack will cause shipping rates to skyrocket. That ends China's manufacturing advantage and ME oil supply.

China can adjust ... but how quickly?

I disagree China wouldn't invade if forced into this position. They'd take Taiwan quickly ...

When I said China wouldn't invade, I was responding to Don Bacon's comment about the importance of logistics. There wouldn't be logistics necessary for a battle for Taiwan because China can take Taiwan before such logistics become a factor.

And I don't think South Korea would fall quite so quickly or easily as you believe.

=
vetinLA @Oct2 23:23 #117: the class war

China provides a governance model that may inspire the Western public to demand real change. So we see propaganda attacks against China. And rising tensions help to vitiate that propaganda.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 3 2021 0:33 utc | 120

Hi james. You know, as a Canadian, I wanted to say sorry about the US's humiliating defeat in Afghanistan. We feel your pain.

Losing a war is embarrassing, but it happens. And if the Taliban kicked your ass at least they didn't burn down the White House.

You know, like that time in 1812?
https://youtu.be/WVC677-YmfM

Posted by: David G Horsman | Oct 3 2021 0:46 utc | 121

=
Roger @Oct2 20:23 #104: simplistic usage of the Peloponnesian wars

Yeah, it's simplistic. But it's also intuitively appealing.

Please tell us what is wrong with this simple version of the 'trap': an established power will generally try to prevent a rising power to become so powerful that it could challenge the established power.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 2 2021 22:16 utc | 112
-----------------
It was said that Thucydides is an unreliable narrator. But he is unreliable in a very interesting and didactic way. The narrative is clear and logical. But it is more usual in history that terrible war were messy. Most suspiciously, the book contains debates with exchanges of speeches, which are clear and logical. Are there any corroborated examples of such debates? To me, these debates were inside the mind of the author, both sides finding arguments that he finds acceptable, instead of absurdly argued hatred of the enemies, traitors and perceived traitors etc.

The setting of the Pelopponessian war is actually a good model for the current global situations. Two major (locally) powers, each having highly dependent allies and deeply convinced that it would be MUCH better if the other were reduced to the position of a highly dependent ally.

One aspect that we can learn from history is what happens AFTER the war, with victims and victors. Athens lost, Sparta won -- only to be shattered few decades later because it succumbed to greed, expansion and oppression (rather than focusing on supervising their own helots). Or take the fate of glorious overseas expeditions, like Sicilian Expedition, or even more ambitions, domination of Afghanistan by USA.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 3 2021 0:55 utc | 122

I also think a blockade isn't likely as that would almost absolutely lead to a shooting war.

"I disagree with this. Merely the threat of attack will cause shipping rates to skyrocket. That ends China's manufacturing advantage and ME oil supply.

China can adjust ... but how quickly?"

Yes, but isn't that what a blockade would do? The very purpose of the blockade is to prevent China from shipping to harm their industry.

I'd argue that once a blockade is in place, China has no choice but to hit with everything they have short of nukes. They aren't going to wait around while their economy and industrial production is stifled...they will make the USA pay the price, and then some...and that is completely within their capabilities.

It looks to me like China is prepared for war, they would be able to switch to war production mode almost immediately. It would be the West that would be slow to adjust.

In the event of war, China does not need ME oil, they have enough domestic oil to wage a multi-year war.

South Korea wouldn't fall easily, neither would Taiwan for that matter, but they would fall, there is no way to reinforce either once the shooting starts. Tens of thousands of casualties on both sides within a short amount of time.

To continue fighting USA would need a draft. Given current social conditions in The States how do you think a draft would play out?

Posted by: Haassaan | Oct 3 2021 0:57 utc | 123

I just "Rick Rolled" my American friends here james. It's at least partly your fault.

"Rick Astley Never Gonna Give You Up
(Official Music
https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQVideo)"

However Rick Astley is out of context in a geopolitical discussion. A far better warning regarding war with China:

Barry McGuire
Eve of Destruction
https://youtu.be/ntLsElbW9Xo

Posted by: David G Horsman | Oct 3 2021 0:57 utc | 124

i find you hard to follow david.... i have a hard time following you either way... regards...

Posted by: james | Oct 3 2021 1:29 utc | 125

Thank you Roger @ 111 and Baron @ 115 for trying to inject a dose of reality into this notion of a USN or even AUKUS enforced blockade of China.

Gruff @ 109 re: "a faction within the empire who believe this is doable with a naval blockade...."
First, blockade is an act of war, and the Chinese would be well within their rights to attack and sink any ship trying to enforce any such blockade whether in their own territorial or international waters. So there's a high probability that any attempt to actually enforce a blockade would lead to a real hot war in East Asia. And, once again, this blockade would be completely illegal since there would be absolutely no UNSC approval for any such action.

Second, with the lengthy supply chains required to support such an effort even from Pearl Harbour, the US probably will have to utilise it's most forward military bases in the region which means both South Korea and especially Japan which is home to over a dozen major bases that are locations for key Indo-Pacific assets of the USN, USAF and USMC. If these bases or rather their units actually launch military attacks against China then the countries that house those bases would themselves be open to direct military retaliation from China.

Both S Korea and Japan rely on shipping lanes well within the range of the Chinese conventional missile arsenal. The Chinese could respond with their own form of a blockade, shutting down the Japanese and S Korean SLOCs in a week or two by sinking (or threatening to sink) tankers and container ships in the Sea of Japan. The Japanese and SK economies require vast volumes of imported energy and other raw goods resources and are just as vulnerable as China is to a maritime blockade. So if the US wants to play the blockade game then China has options and can respond in kind with similar types of action against not only two major US allies but two of the largest economies in the world.

Third, on top of the above, nobody mentions the huge, and I mean huge, amount of trade between the countries of ASEAN ie SE Asia and China. Indonesia alone has I believe almost $50-60 billions of trade with China per annum. Add in Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore etc. and you're talking at least a couple of hundred billion pa. Are these countries going to sit back and allow the US and its Anglo Saxon poodles to destroy their economies? Nope, didn't think so.

Finally, everyone really should read the books by Andrei Martyanov to understand the new realities, that the next war in the Pacific won't be won by some USMC "island hopping" strategy or another round of Midways and Coral Seas. It's going to be won by the country that can launch salvo after salvo of conventional anti ship and anti air and other conventional missiles. Think about it - there's lots of numbers thrown around on the internet re the Iranian and Hezbollah guided missile arsenals, 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 etc. That's Iran and Hezbollah working under the most stringent sanctions in the world.

So how many advanced anti-ship missiles do you think the manufacturing powerhouse that is China has stored away for a rainy day? Bear in mind, some of those missiles have been in mass production for several years now. 40,000? 50,000? More? And, yes, there's some question re the actual operational efficacy of Chinese anti-ship missile targeting. Still, assuming they get their targeting systems right (maybe with a little help from Shoigu et al!) how long do you think the USN and its allies will last when the Chinese fire salvoes of a 100, 200, 500, or even 1000 AS missiles per day for a week or even two?

Posted by: thermobarbaric | Oct 3 2021 1:30 utc | 126

thermobarbaric @125

Yes, I mentioned naval blockade as one example of the empire escalating to overt warfare against China in addition to its current covert war. Yes, realistically such efforts by the empire cannot succeed beyond a temporary and relatively brief suppression of China's GDP. But next year it will be even harder for the empire to dent China's economic growth, and the year after harder still.

Are you so foolish as to think the empire will give up without a fight?

It doesn't matter that it is a bad idea. The empire is out of alternatives to war.

Posted by: William Gruff | Oct 3 2021 1:43 utc | 127


"In a few years, another country with a nuclear submarine fleet will appear in the world – Australia. What kind of submarines will this country receive from its allies, what kind of combat capabilities do they provide, and according to what scenario can they be used to contain China’s military power?

Everything is learned by comparison. What are the eight multi-purpose nuclear submarines that Australia will receive (not to be confused with submarines armed with ballistic missiles)? Let’s compare them with other fleets.

First, take the example of China, against which (at least, so they say) everything is being planned. Now China has only nine multi-purpose nuclear submarines, with low stealth. Three of them are Project 091; these are old and noisy vessels that have almost no combat value. The remaining six are Project 093, more modern boats, which, however, are inferior to modern American and British ones. In fact, only these six have a real combat value, and it is this number that should be taken into account.

...Here is just one of many examples. Geographically, Australia can completely block the connection between China and the Indian Ocean: there is a direct exit there and this is not controlled by China in any way. China only has the Strait of Malacca, which with its new submarines Australia will be able to block from the Indian Ocean. Or go past Australia itself, with the same submarines and its aircraft. There is no other road by which a large amount of oil can be supplied to China.


... It is worth recognizing that the world is on the verge of war. Australia’s agreement with the United States and Britain says exactly this. An ordinary world war with tens of millions of dead, as one option, or with hundreds of millions; after all, no one has canceled nuclear weapons. Such a war is almost inevitable.

Moreover, knowing what deadlines the ‘partners’ set for themselves, you can roughly understand the time for which they are preparing the ‘hot phase’. And looking at how other countries are preparing for the next world war, it’s time for us to take a critical, honest and non-biased look at how we are preparing for it.”


https://anti-empire.com/the-first-russian-strategic-assessment-of-the-australia-uk-us-usuka-submarine-pact/

Posted by: daffyDuct | Oct 3 2021 1:48 utc | 128

The Empire does have an alternative to war: in return for no war, China and associated powers assure the U.S. and the Empire a soft landing. I am confident the Chinese leaders see that that would be preferable to war. Whether people in power in D.C. see that, I have my doubts.

Posted by: Lysias | Oct 3 2021 1:53 utc | 129

@ JR 112
You're forgetting that USA has bases in Japan, South Korea, Guam, Australia, etc.?

No, I already mentioned that the two dozen Japan and the half dozen Korea bases would be leveled. That's a given. Guam also. After the US planes take off, at least break up the airstrips so they can't return. Australia is two thousand miles away and out of it, so long as they don't participate in any US offensive.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 2:02 utc | 130

@ thermobarbaric 125
So how many advanced anti-ship missiles do you think the manufacturing powerhouse that is China has stored away for a rainy day?

Yes. We're now in a missile world which has obsoleted old ideas, including US-beloved aircraft carriers to be specific. Call it progress. Just as longer-range ship-launched aircraft obsoleted the guns on battleships, now longer-range missiles have obsoleted twelve billion dollar carriers with short-range aircraft (F-35, I'm looking at you).

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 2:14 utc | 131

I'm curious as to how an Australian sub, or two, can block the Straits of Malacca. Will they be sinking a few tankers (just the ones going from Iran to China of course) or will they be accompanied by surface vessels making inspections. Will tankers going to Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand etc. be exempt? Perhaps one of our naval warfare experts can explain.

Posted by: dh | Oct 3 2021 2:16 utc | 132

@ dD 127
In a few years, another country with a nuclear submarine fleet will appear in the world – Australia.

Baloney. A few years? The announcement said the three countries were going to take eighteen months to study it. Then, if they did decide that Oz should produce these complicated ships, that's if, it would take decades for Australia to produce anything, given their current ship-building capabilities. It takes the US five years to build one.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 2:21 utc | 133

"Please tell us what is wrong with this simple version of the 'trap': an established power will generally try to prevent a rising power to become so powerful that it could challenge the established power."

Jackrabbit @ 112 Thanks for your continuing take on things.
It's quite important to be able to reduce a complex narrative.

Okay folks, stay with me here... if that's even possible down my rabbit hole.

Read that comment again but assume we are talking about biology and species. It is on some level an analog. A similar pattern emerges in different contexts without obvious forces driving it. This is extremely common in nature.

There is a paper somewhere that concludes that Jackrabbit's scenario can happen in animal populations. The new variant can't get a foothold.

It has become ever more "taboo" to draw comparisons between humans and other mammals. Given the amount of dehumanizing we live with that's probably a good thing. But it is terrible science.

My definition of "being" is that you are being it at every level concurrently. From below the quantum level to the being part of the mass of the planet. The field you exert on the universe is quite large.

So then the truth value of a statement you make is within or at a level or context. This avoids frequent erroneous reasoning and fallacies.

So the toy example is that you can't break the laws of physics in your analysis of the election. Obviously.

It isn't "the truth". It is instructive.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Oct 3 2021 2:38 utc | 134

"... love the humour... keep it up!"
james @ 35 It would help if I didn't speak in riddles.
I noticed you love music, humour and are in occupied Canada.
And well... I used to be a troll...

So that whole War of 1812 thing?
It was like the stars aligned I tell you.
How could I resist?
I do apologize for including you in my nefarious plan to propagandize our community. Canadians always say sorry you know.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Oct 3 2021 2:50 utc | 135

thermobarbaric @Oct3 1:30 #125:

... blockade is an act of war, and the Chinese would be well within their rights to attack and sink any ship trying to enforce any such blockade ..

What if the "blockade" is enforced by missiles, drones, and sanctions instead of warships? And, if warships are involved, they will likely be positioned far from Chinese attack while being close enough to shipping lanes to harass/prevent passage.

... USMC "island hopping" strategy or another round of Midways and Coral Seas.

It's true that too many pundits/analysts talk about the next war (wherever it may be) as being like the last.

But saying that those old strategies won't work doesn't mean that there is no strategy that will work. It doesn't mean that the world is safe from war.

<> <> <> <> <>

Any credible threat to shipping would mean insurance rates soar. The increased cost of trade would spur industry in the West while China's Military Industrial Complex (MIC) would gain a stronger hand which could ally with anti-democratic/capitalist interests (much like in USA). A Chinese coup in 20 years would be preferable to a devastating war. As China becomes more like USA it is less of a threat to the wealthy interests in the West.

In this 'Jackrabbit scenario', war is unnecessary but the threat of war and the nerve-wracking super-high tensions of brinkmanship is necessary.

With that said, there are too many variables at play to say that either side will win, or if war will be avoided.

Special note: this is the wet dream of the commenter known as 'donkeytale'. He tried to convince us that 'Chinese elites' are allied with Western oligarchs but it's clear (to the rest of us) that that is not so. But IMO the Empire tried to make that happen and is likely to continue to push toward that goal.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 3 2021 3:09 utc | 136

@ JR 135

The increased cost of trade would spur industry in the West
Factories will just pop up everywhere? No.

As China becomes more like USA
Never happen. Chinese are what they are, and it isn't becoming more like Americans. It has to do with 5,000 years of culture, Confucianism, Taoism etc. So Chinese have a whole different way of looking at matters, such as working together toward a better life (which they have largely accomplished) w/o the petty political combative self-aggrandisement "democracy" so dominant in the USA. Chinese do this under a qualified up-through-the-ranks leader, and not having to accept an elected weirdo as in the US. The fact that Chinese are different from Americans, and will never be like them, has been a deep disappointment in Washington, but that's the way it is and the way it will be.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 3:31 utc | 137

@ David G Horsman | Oct 3 2021 2:50 utc | 134... a musician friend of mine says 'sorry' when he's raising a pint with friends... he wants all of us to say it, lol... thinks it is a canuck thing.... one has to be a good reader between the lines with you david!

Posted by: james | Oct 3 2021 4:12 utc | 138

Below is the title of a current lie story heading at Reuters

"
At 39 aircraft, China sets new high for Taiwan defence zone incursion
"

It was 38 but is now 39 levels of obfuscation of reality....I refused to read about the additional plane claim at Reuters

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 3 2021 5:42 utc | 139

Below is from Xinhuanet

"
BEIJING, Oct. 2 (Xinhua) -- For years, the unspoken truth about Western media is that their veneer of objectivity has come off a long time ago. While touting themselves as the epitome of trustworthiness and honesty, some media practitioners in the West have no qualms about propagating lies against China.

As the coordinated anti-China smear campaign is gaining steam, more intrepid journalists with a conscience are calling it out despite the tremendous pressure to silence them.

In one of the most excoriating rebukes against Western media's manipulation of the public opinion against China, Javier Garcia, head of the office of the EFE News Agency of Spain in Beijing, announced earlier this week that he would soon leave journalism, as the flagrant information manipulation by Western media "has taken a good dose of my enthusiasm for this profession."

The departure of journalists like Garcia is a giant loss to the industry, which is in dire need of introspection. For those who choose to stay and disagree with the highly biased and distorted reporting on China, they are usually confronted with a monolithic propaganda structure in the West to ignore, silence and discredit them.

The past few years have seen a lot of deplorable cases where anyone who dared to maintain objective and impartial positions on China were accused of being on the payroll of the Chinese government or even worse.

While they are working arduously to suppress impartial information and hoping it to pay off, some media in the West, especially in the United States, should expect that the chickens will come home to roost, as their own political order is at risk.

Even James Murdoch, son of right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch who owns FOX News, castigated U.S. media for amplifying disinformation that successfully sowed falsehoods.

"Those outlets that propagate lies to their audience have unleashed insidious and uncontrollable forces that will be with us for years," he told the Financial Times shortly after the U.S. Congress riot in early January.

For those Western media who are still slandering China's peaceful development, it is time for them to think twice.
"

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 3 2021 6:15 utc | 140

I'm completely rusted onto the notion that China doesn't give a tinker's cuss what the Yanks, or some Taiwanese panic merchants, SAY about Taiwan Independence. So long as the dumbass, chickenshit Yankees keep pretending that they're a 'sole Superpower, the Chinese are going to keep winding them up/ yanking their chain. And laughing their asses off.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 3 2021 6:37 utc | 141

Haassaan | Oct 3 2021 0:57 utc | 122

"To continue fighting USA would need a draft. Given current social conditions in The States how do you think a draft would play out?"

In the actual climate in the US, a draft could be seen as a good thing by the .001%! ie. Military "law/rules" would be established. (No dissent allowed). It could be used as a means of fielding a regular force to control the un-drafted population, and as a supplementary "Semi-Police" force.

"Able-bodied men and women" could be drafted and taught to obey and be subject to discipline by a hierarchy. (Note that the US IS talking about incorporating women into the Military) They may have a problem with personal noun people, but by using a strictly physical basis they could probably sort things out. (There have been media efforts to "attract" various letters of the Alphabet, and the oversized. The draft idea is not to select the "best" but incorporate everyone).

One principal reason that many countries gave up conscription after WWII, was the cost. But since the US regularly spends what it doesn't have - and nobody does anything, this is probably no longer seen as a problem.
**

Other countries that do have conscription (Russia), used the time spent to educate the more retarded members of the population, AND as a unifying force for nationalism. (Note that I think the normal education of Russians is already superior to most of that in the US).
**

What is not to like for the rich Core-thuggery? Obedience by arming some to compel obedience from others.

Posted by: Stonebird | Oct 3 2021 7:56 utc | 142

Is this typical 'western' anti-Marxism propaganda? : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ9myHhpS9s

Posted by: Antonym | Oct 3 2021 7:59 utc | 143

@MoA

thank you, i myself have queried and commented since a while about these articles, a simple Google search prompted me as well to think it was all BS once i looked at the borders of Taiwan's ADIZ. I always wondered how many of those planes flying over China were being used to ramp up war propaganda.

Posted by: Et Tu | Oct 3 2021 9:33 utc | 144

Gruff @ 125: "Are you so foolish as to think the empire will give up without a fight?"

Sadly, I don't think so. My point is that the US (as always) will act with typical overconfidence and lack of foresight. It will completely misjudge the consequences of its naval blockade and the subsequent escalations on both sides will inevitably plunge the region and very likely the world into a war which will end with dire results for all of us.

Posted by: thermobarbaric | Oct 3 2021 9:49 utc | 145

re have a structure maybe, that defines a mind control technique used by those who have monopoly power of the media (PIGOs private imperial global oligarch).

<==inversion <=protected space or interest< infringement <=propaganda <= distribution to target audience.

inversion <=here imperialism is inverted.
infringement <=claim protected interest violated
propaganda <=the claim and facts which support the claim are produced into propaganda (a report).
distribution <= a headline and short summary about the report is made known to the target audience but the report often is not made easily available to the audience.

So we have a generation of a protected situation a claim that everyone should be fearful or concerned that inverted imperialist, have actually invaded a space, said to be protected. The propaganda focus seems to be on generating a protected space (from real or make believe facts), and making a claim that a nation state of the other has invaded that space?

elements of this mind control tool

Oriental Voice @ 10 .. "I would raise the question of what legitimize any claim of sovereign territory? I know not of any written or verbalized documentations by any so-called "creator" of this globe to have granted any piece of land to any human entities. "

<= you have just described the reason for the nation state system and the true basis of Capitalism.

Natural law does not recognize property rights. Natural law allows the most efficient user of the land to use the land only so long as the user is the most efficient user. In other words, all lands are public lands, and a use greater than public need is guaranteed by a user of that land for a user that increases the value of the land over its value to the public.

Capitalism depends on private (Monopoly ownership) rights created by rule of law. Private ownership of land is created when a law makes it possible for a claim to be recorded in a government land registration office and the a law is written to protect that claim of private ownership in the land.

Private ownership of an object produced from a creative mind (of a person) activity can only happen if a law is created that makes it possible for a private party to record a claim of private ownership (monopoly power) over the use, access and control over the manner and means to make the object and over the use of all objects produced by such manner or means.

Private ownership of a work of art or writing, printing, or computer software program can only happen if some authority exist to make it possible for claims of ownership to be registered by the person making the claim, and if after registration some power of the state will enforce that private ownership claim against all
persons not parties to the claim. These are called copyrights.

Trademarks are private ownership of a mark, name or something they to require both a creation of right law and a protection of that right law by the government.

In other words private property rights are creations of, and generally a major justification by the PIGO for the nation state system..90% of the wealth shown on listed balance sheets of public companies (according to Ocean Tomo) today are intangible assets (patents, copyrights and trademarks). Small business and private owners own most of the rule of law private rights in hard assets and worse, they are generally acquired by browing from bankers and worse still they are taxed by local governments. The intangible assets are
barely taxed at all.

Posted by: snake | Oct 3 2021 9:51 utc | 146

"Taiwan's Defence Ministry" has not postad -- nor declared anything.
The reason is simple: "Taiwan's Defence Ministry" does not exist.
Likewise, there is no Taiwanese airforce, army, navy nor rocket defence. We see this clearly from this quote:
.
"Air activities in the southwestern ADIZ of R.O.C."
.
"R.O.C." Means "Republic of China". Which is the political and military entity. Of course, a putative "Taiwan Airforce" would never claim the right to infringe on the friendly neighouring provine of Fujian.
.
If the island province suddenly got an airforce of its own, this would oblige both the Peoples republic of China and the "R.O.C." to start attacking and invading the province of Taiwan at once.

Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐/טלפ וש | Oct 3 2021 11:04 utc | 147

All mentiones of the "Thukidides trap" in these comments leave out the fact that wrote at the very beginning of his book thet the "trap" was two-pronged: First, fearful power competition -- Spartans agonizing that Athens was growing too powerful. BUT the second factor which he mentions almost at once afterwards was the corruption og the Athenian system of governance: He wrote that the Athenians became more and more like the other states they had subjected to tributary positions, thus no longer able to propagate an alternative to the Spartan model of dominance through pure military coercion. This is a very intellectually astute observation from a man who was an aristocrat and no great fan of Athenian diect democracy.
Now, the US of North A has systematically undermined its own vision of itself as having been founded as a somewhat republican representative (elected) democracy, and have become more and more like its Latin American satrapies where the Yankee dollar rules through locally bribed elite families.
Vladimir Putin some years ago asked demagogically: "Are the United States a banana republic?" and then stepped back with an astonished look on his face, realizing thet the US of North a in fact probably has become a "Banana Republic".
Of course, bananas grow both in Hawaii and Puerto Rica and in the Mainland state of Florida as well!

Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐/טלפ וש | Oct 3 2021 13:22 utc | 148

@ TA 146
"Air activities in the southwestern ADIZ of R.O.C." . . .etc

I agree with your drift, but just tweak it a bit. Taipei now calls itself "The Republic of China (Taiwan)" which pleases everybody and correctly informs nobody.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 14:07 utc | 149

@Jackrabbit | Oct 3 2021 3:09 utc | 135

What if the "blockade" is enforced by missiles, drones, and sanctions instead of warships? And, if warships are involved, they will likely be positioned far from Chinese attack while being close enough to shipping lanes to harass/prevent passage.

Sanctioning by missile or drone would cause a shooting war. It wouldn't matter if the US tried to launch the missiles sneakily, or if they conned a third country to do the dirty. China would know who was ultimately responsible, and they would act accordingly. Yes, this would become a shooting war. And as others have noted, the US would likely lose.

Posted by: Cyril | Oct 3 2021 14:14 utc | 150

@131 No response from our naval warfare experts. Never mind. I've been doing my own research on the Malacca Strait.

It's a very busy place. Hundreds of ships going through all the time. But if the Australian subs are in good shape with well-trained crews they should fit in OK. Nothing can possibly go wrong.

https://www.nippon-foundation.or.jp/en/what/projects/safe_passage

Posted by: dh | Oct 3 2021 14:15 utc | 151

@ snake 145
. . . private property rights are creations of, and generally a major justification by the PIGO for the nation state system.

Yes. . . .in the news regarding "intellectual property":
. . . the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security warned this week that hackers tied to the Chinese government are attempting to steal U.S. research related to coronavirus vaccines, treatments and testing.
While the coronavirus pandemic has shut down federal courts and forced most federal employees to telework, law enforcement officials say the work of combating Chinese intellectual property theft — as well as other investigations — continues, with more cases likely to be announced in the coming months. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 14:16 utc | 152

Just read this article on Global Times about the flights. To me it is interesting that it does not really point out the hypocrisy of flying over Taiwan airspace but sort of brags about it.

Record number of PLA warplanes flying over Taiwan Straits as form of National Day ‘military parade’: Global Times editorial

Posted by: arby | Oct 3 2021 14:18 utc | 153

Regarding shipping, the US is totally promoting "freedom of navigation" and a "free and open Indo-Pacific" . . .which are good indicators that they will do the opposite. In fact as a general rule, expect the government to do the opposite of what they say.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 14:19 utc | 154

@ arby 152
The Taiwan Strait is international water.The US frequently sails warships through the Strait and brags about it.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 14:25 utc | 155


"There is no Thucydides Trap, there is only the clash of empires, which is to say, the clash of national capitals. The use of arms to divide the world is not a trap, it is standard operating procedures. The phrase Thucydides Trap is a way to pretend reality can be finessed with just the right combinations of carrots, stick and PR,"s

Steven t johnson @ 81 What a great dialog. You could look at it that way too.

The varacity of the myth can't post hoc negate the concept. It could falsify it possibly but the idea remains.

Here I think it's a thing, but not a determining thing. It could be a factor, influence, component of strategy or what have you.

In my area it would be an object, property or weight. What's of interest is it acts like an attractor. You might bias towards considering it. But that's among many things.

The extent to which it is a trap depends on a lack of other options and presupposes a rather bleak outcome.

It begs the question what would you do instead?

Posted by: David G Horsman | Oct 3 2021 17:24 utc | 156

Don Bacon's response to @152 to snake 145 <= its 146 but thanks.
. . . private property rights are creations of, and generally a major justification by the PIGO for the nation state system.

DB responds=> Yes. . .in the news regarding "intellectual property":
. . . the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security warned this week that hackers tied to the Chinese government are attempting to steal U.S. research related to coronavirus vaccines, treatments and testing.

While the coronavirus pandemic has shut down federal courts and forced most federal employees to telework, law enforcement officials say the work of combating Chinese intellectual property theft — as well as other investigations — continues, with more cases likely to be announced in the coming months. . .here


Snake responds <=IMO, the theft the FBI and Homeland security should be concerned about happened when the technology to study and make and produce vaccines was privatized into PIGO hands by recording laws and enforcement laws (copyright and patent enforced by government).

IMO every scientist and person capable to contribute to anti viral defensive effort targeted at saving humanity from pandemics should have complete and total access to review, exploit and use all technologies and facilities known to mankind? After all, the propaganda says our entire civilization is at risk; why should the many depend on the few ?

Copyright, patent and trademarks are wealth extractive.. They increase prices [profit = price-cost]. Increased prices extract from populations massive numbers of increments of wealth. These increments (mini-wealth monopoly powered extractions) collectively produce substantial wealth and direct it into the hands of private owners of monopoly powers.

Each product buyer must separately pay the monopoly cost + the producing cost <= if a ditch digger digs a ditch, she gets paid once for the effort, but if an inventor patents a useful art or thing, she gets paid for the singular effort, every time, someone buys a product which touches on the patent or copyright or trademark.

In your post @ 152, we see the narrative model of propaganda at work
<==inversion <=protected space or interest< infringement <=propaganda <= distribution to target audience.

The enabling basis of globalization has been PIGO owned privately coveted monopoly power..its object seems to be for the PIGO to own the world and everything and everyone in it?

I believe, if monopoly powers were eliminated, the result would likely produce global human socialization with so much concentration of directed force that global projects would continuously produce improvements for all mankind stationed on this earth?

It makes no sense to allow a select few to collectively frustrate the life experience of so many. The only global entity on earth<=is humanity!

Posted by: snake | Oct 3 2021 17:26 utc | 157

William and IRAN,
"The Chinese know that they are under biological weapons attack, but as Oriental Voice @43 points out they are not squealing about it as a western nation would"

On the limited list of options this is a big one. I have never heard of it not being used by a great power.

Regarding the chip and electronics manufacturing, the plants should be underground with the nuclear plants.

I expect that is and will be a portion of China's infrastructure. Iran should take a moment to consider both the importance and vulnerability of the electronics industry.

This (tunneling underground) could be a general arms race escalation. If it does it all started with Vietnam.

Lol. China will do this while Elon Musk goes around talking nonsense about it. I haven't seen "China Debunked" much. Elon's ideas have been debunked a few times.

(Disclaimer) In my comedy routine Musk was the evil villain about to kill us off with his AI. My mission is to stop him at any cost by building The Human Hivemind (tm).

I would go so far as to say it's based on a true story. AI is the biggest threat we currently face in my view.

Posted by: David G Horsman | Oct 3 2021 18:23 utc | 158

@ snake (#157), agree “The enabling basis of globalization has been PIGO owned privately coveted monopoly power..its object seems to be for the PIGO to own the world and everything and everyone in it.” What one question will expose this PIGO? Just one question!

PIC (Private Imperialist Cartel) wants to enslave countries, companies, citizens,... Complete control.

To understand PRIVATE MONOPOLY Power follow the money. Understand how monarchs lost control of their money to private bankers, privatizing the power. Having learned how to control joint-stock companies and monarchs/state, bankers created capitalism and communism. They then created, “gamekeepers”, “gatekeepers” and “poachers.” History of our global culture, economics, and political world is fascinating. If one learns from this history they will gain clarity and insights!

Ideas —> Interests —> Institutions

“What is the most resilient parasite? Bacteria? A virus? An intestinal worm? An IDEA. Every revolution begins with a spark!

Humanity will win freedom! Gandalf, Aragorn,... have arrived! “In God We Trust”

Posted by: Max | Oct 3 2021 18:32 utc | 159

Cyril @Oct3 14:14 #150:

Sanctioning by missile or drone would cause a shooting war.

The sanctions are against third-party countries. Policing of those sanctions by drone or missile would also be against those who seek to profit from trading despite those sanctions.

Shipping to/from China is a massive enterprise. AFAIK, most of those ships are not Chinese. Any who try to run the blockade would be subject to attack.

A typical ruse by a blockade runner might be to say that they are trading with a country near China (e.g. Vietnam).

What I am sensing is that the Empire may seek to cripple China without an overt act of war - even if China complains that it is an act of war. And, whatever China's response to this blockade, it will be used as reason to further tighten the screws... until China attacks or changes.

It is possible that China will be subject to an Iran-like sanctions regime. A near total cut-off of trade. Some will say that's impossible or that it would be fruitless - but they would've said the same about such a goal regarding Iran. Yet it has happened.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 3 2021 18:32 utc | 160

@160 You are comparing Iran to China? Putting sanctions on Iran was fairly easy. Not totally effective either.

You are right about shipping to and from China being massive. So the US navy is going to inspect them all and sink the ones they don't like? Or will they sanction any country that does business with China? Including the US itself. You are more impressed by US capabilities than me.

Posted by: dh | Oct 3 2021 19:53 utc | 161

Posted by: David G Horsman | Oct 3 2021 18:23 utc | 158 et al

"(Disclaimer) In my comedy routine Musk was the evil villain about to kill us off with his AI. My mission is to stop him at any cost by building The Human Hivemind (tm).

I would go so far as to say it's based on a true story. AI is the biggest threat we currently face in my view."

That suggests the human mind acts hive-like to interfere and control Mankind...The mind seems an AI creation toward a not-helpful effect on humans.

Built deep underground...

All approaches camouflaged...

and mostly dead-ended...

and booby-trapped...

Itself a trap of

Programmed sub-routines...

Designed by authors unknown lest the effects be undone.

But a Rubik's Cube can be resolved without knowing its designer.

Posted by: chu teh | Oct 3 2021 20:08 utc | 162

. . .from npr, Oct 2
Biden campaigned against the trade war with China, but ending it is complicated
...After a lengthy review that has frustrated U.S. business groups, who say the tariffs have been an unfair burden, U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai plans to give a major speech on the U.S.-China trade relationship on Monday. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 21:14 utc | 163

Gotta have a little humor. . .
..from TaipeiTimes, Oct 3
EDITORIAL: Aggression is no way to celebrate

. . .As Minister of Foreign Affairs Joseph Wu (吳釗燮) wrote on Twitter yesterday: “Oct. 1 wasn’t a good day. The PLAAF flew 38 warplanes into Taiwan’s ADIZ, making it the largest number of daily sorties on record. Threatening? Of course. It’s strange the PRC doesn’t bother faking excuses anymore.”
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office on the eve of China’s national day issued a statement of more than 1,200 words to denounce Wu, enumerating his “deceptive” remarks advocating Taiwanese independence, even describing him as a “weeping fly.” . . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 3 2021 21:32 utc | 164

arby @153

That's probably because b. is mistaken in his analysis as to the meaning of what has happened - China intended this as an open challenging assertion of its sovereignty over Taiwan (and more such actions will be coming in the future).

China in Massive Show of Force near Taiwan, Threatens Military Action, Tells EU to Mind own Business (Alexander Mercouris)

Posted by: ADKC | Oct 3 2021 21:59 utc | 165

Readers may or may not know the following facts. Oct 1 is China's national day and a big celebration and holiday for billions. It has been the tradition of US military to probe and provoke China during their holiday seasons (e.g. Chinese New Year, mid-Autumn festival, etc).

Two US carrier groups are currently stationed east of Taiwan, performing all sort of military exercises and provocation. Japanese, Australian and UK ships and/or planes are also involved. They tried to approach in mainland/Taiwan direction, especially at night. There were also unknown number of submarines. In addition, strategy bombers (B-52) were flew in from Guam.

China responded with 38 and 39 sorties on Oct 1 and 2 respectively, to intercept the US led forces. None of these confrontations have to do with Taiwan. But Taiwanese hypocritically complain, against China. Ironically, they are quiet about the real provocateurs.

Posted by: d dan | Oct 3 2021 23:19 utc | 166

@ dd 166
Yes, good point. The Reagan carrier group has been in the South China Sea and the Vinson carrier group has been exercising with other countries in the Philippine Sea, with about seven thousand personnel in each group. What strikes me is that the US hasn't bragged about it as they usually do. Two carrier groups from far away sticking it to China! [Undermining regional peace and stability!]

What Washington has been crabbing about is the forty or so planes China has been flying over international waters off its coast.
...from the State Dept...

"The United States is very concerned by the People’s Republic of China’s provocative military activity near Taiwan, which is destabilizing, risks miscalculations, and undermines regional peace and stability. We urge Beijing to cease its military, diplomatic, and economic pressure and coercion against Taiwan," State Department spokesperson Ned Price said in a statement.
"We have an abiding interest in peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. We will continue to assist Taiwan in maintaining a sufficient self-defense capability, and we will maintain our commitments as outlined in the Three Communiqués, the Taiwan Relations Act, and the Six Assurances," Price said in the latest statement. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 4 2021 1:56 utc | 167

Dutton ,
the minister of attack ?

War with China is imminent !

Are these nutjobs possessed ?

Why have we been fighting China for so long?

I don’t know.

Well, isn’t it a bit silly we don’t have a reason for fighting them?

Well, go and fucking make one up!

https://johnmenadue.com/minister-for-attack-can-anything-stop-peter-dutton/

I like these Aussie straight stalk, but its shrinking fast.

Posted by: denk | Oct 4 2021 2:04 utc | 168

Some excellent dialogue here and thanks to Roger with the Greek textbook reference - our Owners really do go that far back as they transmute their public personae through the ages under cover of Religion or Nation - neither of which they have real connection too and so often they sacrifice to retain and extend their power.

That’s the short version. The long version follows immediately below.

Posted by: D.G | Oct 4 2021 11:58 utc | 169

The longer version ... enjoy barflies.

For the century of petrochemical black gold rush wealth harvesting and extension of a Zio-fascist empire to spread its tentacles further across the humanity and the planet certain facilities and ‘contracts’ had to be in place.

The Federal reserve had to be established pretending to be the National Bank of the USA - it has always been privately owned as most fake ‘National’ banks have been - usually by the same People!

A system that would allow further ‘nations’ to be created to tie into the same mechanism of plunder needed to be established.

Major industries based on petro-chemicals and profits from it had to be planned and ownership controlled.

Education of the masses needed to keep them in philosophical and religious ignorance whilst providing trained monkeys was vital.

The system of capture of invention by uncontrolled geniuses to stop innovation that would challenge the centuries of black gold harvesting had to be in place.
Didn’t stop the idea of computing though! Or Nuclear physics that upset all these well laid plans.

Once the planned trench warfare (tried out initially in the US civil war) , poison gasses the mincing machines and weapons were set in place to wipe out the poor young men clamouring towards Revolution - the blue touch paper was lighted.

The bolshevik vanguards sent into finally win the Great Game by attacking Moscow directly with gold from the vaults of Federal reserve. The Royal Family pawns of the Bankers across Europe mere pieces moved about.

The plan to transfer all of the Levant and hence the Middle East where burning bushes for millennia had spoke of the wells of oil and gases to be gathered! We may have held onto our ancient forests and the great Whales if earlier use had been made of these natural resources for power.

So the Zio-fascists , the owners of the East India companies , the originators of the Nation States under the Treaty of Westphalia set forth the mass cull of their slaves in the first Great War.
Start the war set the great European Empires against each other to consolidate ownership of the assets and send the immigrants to the Americas back to Europe to police the Eurasia Empire stretching from Ocean to Ocean.
The British Empire encouraged to ‘extricate’ itself from the planned mire by the Yankee cavalry being invited to land their boots across Europe - after first signing a ‘legal contract’ to hand over the Levant - Palestine - in the Balfour Declaration.

The concept of ‘contract’ a signed paper as opposed to ‘word given’ as a mechanism of control is important to understand as is its origins which takes us back to the beginning of the Slave Owners (the Money) control of humanity through such scriptures.

All else follows from that the planned second war 20 years later to push through Russia from the west whilst Japan did so from the other Ocean through China.

All of it is plains as the ever growing lying Pinocchio noses of these forever owners and their wormtongue idiot Aristos , politicians and the dumbest patriots of every nation who believed in their National Greatness.

All a lie.

It came to crash upon the resilience of the Russian revolution shorn of its Financier Bolshevik actors and their sacrifice of 20 millions of their peoples to survive even as the ‘west’ rushed to build the nuclear weapons to destroy the Russians before the Russians could get to liberate Europe from the Eastern Front.
The Japanese got punished with the weapons for failing the great white financiers and had to hand over their own lands and futures as compensation.

The spread of nuclear bomb knowledge to the targets Russia and then China pretty much brought the great plans to a halt and ever since it has been plan after plan to achieve the Ends by whatever Means.

The war on terror and many a false flag attacks included.
Currently the fight is centred on stopping Europeans finally removing the boot upon them since they were legally invaded by the yankees who then transmuted into nato and the MIC hoodlums demanding 2 percent.

Be gone foul beasts!


Posted by: D.G. | Oct 4 2021 12:00 utc | 170

For these who really believe that last centuries weapons can be used to win the next wars - submarines, sunken convoys, bombing raids - you really haven’t understood what the BRI is.

For instance look at how much rail and road infrastructure there is and the speed and cost reductions of shipping containers across Eurasia and up and down Africa!

Or indeed the kinetic missiles that explained very clearly to the US CentCom their major miscalculation in assassinating Sulemani - which has put a fire under their arses causing them to ‘wind their necks in’ and remove their tanks and planes off other peoples lawns - no further warnings.

Posted by: D.G | Oct 4 2021 12:07 utc | 171

RE: Posted by b on October 1, 2021 at 16:52 UTC | Permalink

“How AP, Reuters And SCMP Propagandize Their Readers Against China”

The conflation of attempt with achievement is a function of “positive thinking”, whilst “Children's crusades” require preparation before implementation, rendering the conflation of believing/thinking not so positive for children.

Posted by: MagdaTam | Oct 4 2021 15:29 utc | 172

ABC.net.au has reinstated a China-related current-affairs TV program called China Tonight. Its theme is what's making news in China generally, and on Chinese social media in particular. Its host is Stan Grant. He does a bit of homework before asking questions but has an irritating habit of sometimes asking a guest a good question but then telling the guest what Stan thinks he was going to say. So we have to wait for Stan to finish blathering before we get to hear the guest's answer.
But he doesn't do it all the time, Thank Heaven.
I'm toying with the idea of emailing Stan and asking him to watch a dozen or so of David Letterman's interviews. Dave knew how to interview like a pro.

Anyhow, at the end of tonight's China Tonight it emerged that China would like to be celebrating unification in 2049!

So, in 2021, are the Dumbass chickenshit Christians jumping the gun, or jumping the shark, by smearing China 28 years too early?

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 4 2021 15:39 utc | 173

. . .from CNN
China sent 52 warplanes into Taiwan defense zone[sic]on Monday, Taipei says . .here

The "Republic of China" has a big holiday coming up on Oct 10. The National Day of the Republic of China, also referred to as Double Ten Day, is a public holiday that is now held annually in Taiwan. It commemorates the start of the Wuchang Uprising on October 10, 1911 which ultimately led to the collapse of the imperial Qing dynasty and establishment of the Republic of China on 1 January 1912, with Sun Yat-Sen as the first ROC president.

So there may be a crescendo of these "incursions" in less than a week. . . Maybe yes, maybe no.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 4 2021 18:29 utc | 174

@ HW173
China would like to be celebrating unification in 2049!

That would be a century after the PRC founding, October 1, 1949. I suspect that Beijing, President Xi especially, has a tighter schedule. It's true that the oriental mind has much less of an urge, than the western mind, to get stuff done as soon as possible, but there are limits.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 4 2021 18:38 utc | 175

The untold reason for the Chinese flights: Stand up to the US and British aggression in sailing two nuclear carriers into the China sea, after fainting adding a third. China could not stand up to the same Clinton move in 1996. Now it can.
https://twitter.com/duandang/status/1445078662110347266

Posted by: fx | Oct 4 2021 18:48 utc | 176

@Jackrabbit | Oct 3 2021 18:32 utc | 160

The sanctions are against third-party countries. Policing of those sanctions by drone or missile would also be against those who seek to profit from trading despite those sanctions.

Makes no difference. If the US tried to disrupt a third country's economic lifeline, the country would immediately ask China for help. And China would be inclined to help, as it would be obvious whom the US was really hitting. The result would be the same: a shooting war that the US would likely lose.

Posted by: Cyril | Oct 4 2021 19:01 utc | 177

Regarding a potential China invasion of Taiwan, US Deputy SecDef Hicks has said that "we have a significant amount of capability forward in the region to tamp down any such potential." . . .here. . . .Well start tamping!

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 4 2021 20:27 utc | 178

Following on from @165

Statement by US Department of State "Increasing People’s Republic of China Military Pressure Against Taiwan Undermines Regional Peace and Stability"

"The United States is very concerned by the People’s Republic of China’s provocative military activity near Taiwan, which is destabilizing, risks miscalculations, and undermines regional peace and stability. We urge Beijing to cease its military, diplomatic, and economic pressure and coercion against Taiwan.

"We have an abiding interest in peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. We will continue to assist Taiwan in maintaining a sufficient self-defense capability, and we will maintain our commitments as outlined in the Three Communiqués, the Taiwan Relations Act, and the Six Assurances. The U.S. commitment to Taiwan is rock solid and contributes to the maintenance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and within the region. We will continue to stand with friends and allies to advance our shared prosperity, security, and values and deepen our ties with democratic Taiwan."

Effectively this statement treats Taiwan as independent of China. US and China are heading towards war over Taiwan if positions don't change.

US Defies China on Taiwan, Calls China's Actions 'Provocative', Taiwan 'Democratic Ally' (Alexander Mercouris)


Posted by: ADKC | Oct 4 2021 21:24 utc | 179

karlofi 2

Trailer:

https://youtu.be/OYnHT_G22hg

The ciminals imperialists used biological weapons to stop the Chinese army in Korea.

Posted by: Olivier73 | Oct 4 2021 22:50 utc | 180

@ ADKC 179
re: we will maintain our commitments as outlined in the Three Communiqués, the Taiwan Relations Act, and the Six Assurances.

Three Communiqués 1972, 1979, and 1982
These documents – issued in 1972, 1979, and 1982 – are the foundation of Sino-American relations. In them, the U.S. government promised that it would no longer maintain official relations with Taipei, that it would have no troops and military installations on the island, and that it would sell only carefully selected defensive weapons to Taiwan on a restrained basis. In the third communiqué, the United States agreed to limit the quality and reduce the quantity of its arms sales to Taiwan.

Taiwan Relations Act 1979
It is the policy of the United States–
to preserve and promote extensive, close, and friendly commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people on Taiwan, as well as the people on the China mainland and all other peoples of the Western Pacific area; . . .
...to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character; and to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force

Six Assurances 1982
H.Con.Res.88 - Reaffirming the Taiwan Relations Act and the Six Assurances as cornerstones of United States-Taiwan relations.
(1) “* * * [W]e did not agree to set a date certain for ending arms sales to Taiwan”;
(2) “* * * [W]e see no mediation role for the United States” between Taiwan and the PRC;
(3) “* * *[N]or will we attempt to exert pressure on Taiwan to enter into negotiations with the PRC”;
(4) “* * * [T]here has been no change in our longstanding position on the issue of sovereignty over Taiwan”;
(5) “We have no plans to seek” revisions to the Taiwan Relations Act; and
(6) the August 17 Communiqué, “should not be read to imply that we have agreed to engage in prior consultations with Beijing on arms sales to Taiwan”;

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 4 2021 23:12 utc | 181

@ Don Bacon | Oct 4 2021 23:12 utc | 181 with the Three Communiqués 1972, 1979, and 1982

Thanks for that refresh and clarity of detail.

It certainly looks like the US is overstepping its agreed upon bounds and everything I am skimming this evening reads like increasing drums of war so facts are not relevant...sigh

Posted by: psychohistorian | Oct 5 2021 1:06 utc | 182

@ ph 182
increasing drums of war

We can expect more action from the congressional squirrels, for one thing. Some recent efforts from the anti-China crowd:

>TAIPEI ACT- signed Mar 26, 2020
...The Act calls for the U.S. government to consider “increasing its economic, security, and diplomatic engagement with nations that have demonstrably strengthened, enhanced, or upgraded relations with Taiwan” — and, by the same token, consider “altering” relations with countries that “take serious or significant actions to undermine the security or prosperity of Taiwan.”

>TAIWAN ASSURANCE ACT OF 2020 - signed Dec 27, 2020
... President Donald Trump signed into law measures to further bolster support for Taiwan and Tibet, which had been included in a $2.3 trillion pandemic aid and spending package. The Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 and Tibetan Policy and Support Act of 2020 both contain language objectionable to China, including U.S. support for Taiwan’s meaningful participation in United Nations bodies and regular arms sales.

>TAIWAN INVASION PREVENTION ACT - unsigned
Jul 29, 2020 - Congressmen Ted S. Yoho (FL-03), Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Asia Subcommittee, announced the introduction of the Taiwan Invasion Prevention Act. This bill authorizes the President to use the Armed Forces to defend Taiwan against a direct attack by China's military, a taking of Taiwan's territory by China, or a threat that endangers the lives of civilians in Taiwan or members of Taiwan's military. The bill also directs the Department of Defense to convene an annual regional security dialogue with Taiwan and other partners to improve U.S. security relationships with countries in the Western Pacific.

>TAIWAN DEFENSE ACT - unsigned
A BILL to maintain the ability of the United States Armed Forces to deny a fait accompli by the People’s Republic of China against Taiwan, and for other purposes.
H.R.7423 & S.3936 - stuck in committees . . . FAIT ACCOMPLI.—The term “fait accompli” means the strategy of the People’s Republic of China designed to allow the People’s Republic of China to use military force to seize control of Taiwan before the United States Armed Forces are able to respond effectively, while simultaneously deterring an effective combined joint response by the United States Armed Forces by convincing the United States that mounting such a response would be prohibitively difficult or costly.

>TAIWAN PEACE & STABILITY ACT of 2021 - unsigned
Jun 17, 2021...Representatives Ami Bera and Steve Chabot, the Democratic and Republican leaders of the House Foreign Affairs Committee's Asia subcommittee, will introduce the "Taiwan Peace and Stability Act," a measure "to support the diplomatic, economic and physical space" of the self-governing island.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 5 2021 3:46 utc | 183

. . .and more
Time to warn Taiwan secessionists and their fomenters: war is real: Global Times editorial
. . .from China Global Times, Oct 4, 2021:

The curtain of preparations for a comprehensive military struggle by the Chinese mainland has obviously been drawn open. The PLA's military drills in the Taiwan Straits are no longer limited to declaring China’s sovereignty over the island, but to implement various forms of assembly, mobilization, assault and logistical preparations that are required to take back the island of Taiwan. Without giving up efforts for a peaceful reunification, it has increasingly become the new mainstream public opinion on the Chinese mainland that the mainland should make earnest preparations based on the possibility of combat.
Now, we will like to warn the DPP authorities and their supporters: do not continue to play with fire. They should see that the Chinese mainland’s preparation to use force against Taiwan secessionist forces is much stronger than ever before. . .here

Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 5 2021 4:09 utc | 184

China's response to the US Statement on Taiwan (see my post @179 - see also Don Bacon posts @181, @ 183, @184)

Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Remarks on Taiwan-related Statement Issued by US State Department Spokesperson - 2021/10/04

"Q: On October 3, US State Department Spokesperson Ned Price issued a statement saying that the US is very concerned by China's provocative military activity near Taiwan, which is destabilizing, risks miscalculations, and undermines regional peace and stability. The US urges China to cease its pressure and coercion against Taiwan. It will continue to assist Taiwan in maintaining a sufficient self-defense capability, and maintain the commitments as outlined in the Three Communiqués, the Taiwan Relations Act, and the Six Assurances. What is China's comment on that?

"A: Taiwan belongs to China and the US is in no position to make irresponsible remarks. The relevant remarks by the US side seriously violate the one-China principle and the stipulations of the three China-US joint communiqués and send an extremely wrong and irresponsible signal.

"For quite some time, the US has been making negative moves by selling arms to Taiwan and strengthening official and military ties with Taiwan, including the launch of a $750 million arms sale plan to Taiwan, the landing of US military aircraft in Taiwan and frequent sailing of US warships across the Taiwan Strait. These provocative moves undermine China-US relations and regional peace and stability. China is firmly opposed to them and has taken necessary countermeasures.

"The one-China principle is the political foundation of China-US relations. On the Taiwan question, the US should abide by the one-China principle and the stipulations of the China-US joint communiqués rather than something cooked up by itself unilaterally.

" "Taiwan independence" leads nowhere. China will take all necessary measures to resolutely crush all attempts at "Taiwan independence". China has firm resolve and will to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

"The US should correct its mistakes, earnestly abide by the one-China principle and the stipulations of the three China-US joint communiqués, prudently and properly handle Taiwan-related issues, stop supporting and emboldening separatist forces of "Taiwan independence", and take concrete actions to safeguard rather than undermine peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait."

China Warns US it Risks War over Taiwan, Deploys Record Number of Aircraft on Combat Drills (alexander Mercouris)

We're moving towards war and this needs to be taken much more seriously by people in the west before it all goes too far.

Posted by: ADKC | Oct 5 2021 21:31 utc | 185

I've been wondering what day to day differences Taiwan citizens would encounter if Taiwan became a state of China, and why no-one is talking about that?

The only things that would change would be a requirement for Taiwan to participate in Chinese Federal elections and to pay Federal Taxes. They could keep their Taiwan government and call it a State/Regional Government - like Hong Kong.

China could probably prepare Taiwan for the minor changes involved by simply launching a Charm Offensive focused on the potential benefits, such as less corruption. It'd be a lot cheaper, and a lot more fun, than threatening an aggressive take-over.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 6 2021 17:24 utc | 186

Hoarsewhisperer @186

As I understand it living in Taiwan is much like living on the mainland. There is significant travel between Taiwan and the mainland (more from Taiwan to the mainland than the other way). Many Taiwanese live and work on the mainland (and, I assume, vice versa). Many mainland Chinese students attend colleges in Taiwan (and, I assume, vice versa).

If Taiwan accepted being part of the mainland at least 40% of Taiwanese wouldn't be mind (a much greater percentage if you termed the question to include those who may not be so keen but would accept and get on with normal life) and, I would assume, only a very small percentage would oppose unification to the point of violence.

The few mainland Chinese that I have met are extremely unconcerned about their government (it just isn't an issue to anything like the same extent, for example, that the US government is for US citizens). In comparison, do the Taiwanese have a love for their democracy? It was born out of my blood, the descendants of the original Formosa elites must harbour mixed feelings, to say the least, and the way in which Taiwan was run for the first 38 years (1949 to 1987, the period of martial law known as the "White Terror") was hardly a model of freedom.

If you can try and see the movie "Formosa Betrayed" (2009) which is based on real events and set in Taiwan during the 1980s.

Posted by: ADKC | Oct 7 2021 22:17 utc | 187

A comment to vk | Oct 13 2021 12:06 utc | 165 and my further comment:

The main wrong with Your comment is that a Táiwan army does not exist. nor any Táiwanese marine or air defence: Of you look at their insignia, they all are maked "Republic of China" (Zhōngghuá míngoó (中華民國)'or something alike. Those armed forces are comitted to not only averting any atack on Táiwan, but also against any incurtions against the islands thay hold outside Fújiàn and in the two China Seas. Ant in the long Run Tibet, Outer Mongolia and Tannu Tuva, By law, that is their impossible mission.

Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐/טלפ וש | Oct 13 2021 17:58 utc | 188

COMMENT À PROPOS THIS:
"@ arby 152
The Taiwan Strait is international water.The US frequently sails warships through the Strait and brags about it."
Also, acording to a treaty between the US of North A and Japan around 1850. the traight between the main islant og Japan (Honshû) and the northern main island (Hokkaidô) was to remain as international waters and a free thouroughfare forever, Which is why the Democratis Republic of Korea (Chosûn) is in its full right to send intercontinental missiles through that straight jus as it pleases -- according not onlu´y to international law, but even to US-Japanese trietis, (UNLESS THE UR REGARDS ALL THIS AS À PAR WITH ITS amer-INDIAN TREAtieS which often stated tay were valid : "AS LONG AS THE SUN SHINES AND THE BUFFLAO WILL ROAM".

Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐/טלפ וש | Oct 13 2021 18:31 utc | 189

First of all: Thuse United States north of the Rio Granda and south of Canada are famous for not adhering to any of their agreed treaties. They have never lived up to their agreements wit the Amerindians.
Secondlu, the US of North A has never intended to adhere to their treaty with the Peaople's Republic of China from 1973-76
THIRDLY, THEUS OF NORTH A never intended to "defend Táian", but iónly to make a show of it.
MY OWN THAUGHT is thus: I Will support Táiwanese independence on the following two ontitiona:
(11 That the regime in Táibeii (T'aibeh') stlen from the Forbidden City in Bêijing back to China
and
(2( that Táiwan pay a yearly price of several million dollars to ina for their usurpery of a Chnese invention -- Chininese written characters -- which is an inheritance belonging to <<<<

both of these implementations would encompass a great civilisational

step into our modern world and anescape fro Yankee dominance .

By the way: All Táiwanese tourist grops i have encountered here in Scandinavia the last 15 years have said they were Chinise When I asked them -- onely therafter 'taiwanese'

Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐/טלפ וש | Oct 13 2021 20:05 utc | 190

« previous page

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Working...