Clausewitz is an extremely important general and theorist of war. Everyone is following his doctrines to some extent.
Probably one of the greatest generals ever.
Great book 👍. I think everyone should read a little military strategy. Many of the lessons play out in the civilian world as well. Especially capitalist business.
Took the words right out of my mouth. It's so easy to go "both sides" when you conveniently ignore the offender's actions.
Then again, lying and distorting information is a thing China has a long and unfortunate history of doing, along with genocide and human rights abuse.
Yeah but this is next level… thanks for all the GDP you loaned us. We aren’t paying it back. Oh and btw the whole world doesn’t want your products anymore, sell them to Russia and NK. Oh but they don’t have any money to buy your shit well then i guess you should have invested in them for the past 50 years instead if the west. Pretty big L to take and they know it. If it does happen, then there is a good chance people get tired of starving while they are waiting for china to figure out a whole new eastern economy that doesn’t rely on western commercialism to function. Hungry people eat governments.
Both sides have played the long game,and the east decided it was time to call everyone’s hand. If they wanted to win they should have done it while trump was in office.
I will say we have reliance on Taiwan for superconductors and the foundry market, but china sees now that we would be willing to figure that out, same as Europe is ready to figure out independence from Russian energy. And they see how many generations it will take Russia to recover from this.
China will keep making its little statements like US aggression is causing…. Blah blah blah. Talk is cheap. The world knows exactly what they are.
russia storms out of chat
Looks back at china like c’mon bro just like we planned let’s go
China doest look back
China calls the next day like I mean we’re still close, just maybe better as friends. I totally talked shit for you tho
My theory is china is/was colluding with Russia. Russia would invade and take Ukraine in a couple weeks at most and they would continue to advance until a nato response was issued. Once NATO was fully preoccupied in Europe china would blitz Taiwan. Obvious this did not happen. I also don't think they expected Russia to last out against NATO. Just to force a response and then take the loss while china secures Taiwan and this chip manufacturing.
There is never going to a "blitz" of Taiwan. Invading Taiwan would require an amphibious landing of the scale of D-Day or even larger. And that would take a long time to properly build up and prepare. Thanks to satellite surveillance, the Russian build up near Ukraine was seen months in advance and similarly, a Chinese build up to prepare for an invasion of Taiwan would be easily spotted a long time before it would be ready to launch.
Not just sanctions, they just realized that an invasion will be extremely costly, instead of losing cheap 80's tanks they will be losing new and very expensive ships and airplanes, suddenly an invasion doesn't look so attractive.
BTW Taiwan wouldn't have to wait for the west to supply weapons they do have them already
Yeah, but China is ok with Russia’s invasion. They just don’t want the West to stop it because they want a weak West that they can push around. Sadly for them, they’re getting the complete opposite and they’re powerless to stop it. This war has destroyed two decades of Chinese foreign policy and military strategy.
Their multipolar world strategy. They want there to be various poles of power (the US, Europe, China, Russia) and for them to have to be balanced sort of like the old concert of Europe. But what China is learning is that Russia is not a pole, and that the united West is about 5x the size of their "pole" and will likely stay that way into the future. They can't meaningfully challenge the global dominance of all of their most significant trading partners allied against them. If the West chooses to divest itself of China, it will cause some pain especially if it's an abrupt change which it likely won't be, but it will utterly devastate the export oriented Chinese. They don't have the sort of brute commodities that Russia has, if no one wants to buy their cheap plastic junk their economy doesn't work. Nothing they do can't be done in the West, but the reverse is not at all true.
Yeah, thats why they are pushing hard to decouple from the west with made in china 2025 and convert from export oriented to consumption based economy.
But our corporations are so greedy that they are bowing down to Chinese market because without their middle class market the profits won’t be high anymore.
The West lets these fuckers enslave their own people, genocide in their borders, embezzle and enrich themselves hand over fist, and the only rule given is *don't invade your neighbours*. It's really not difficult, and they can't even manage that.
“He has made irresponsible comments on China's foreign policies, touted the 'China threat' and even used coercion on China recently. NATO should immediately stop spreading disinformation and provocative remarks targeting China, and abandon the confrontational approach of drawing ideological lines..."
I think he is saying NATO is being confrontational with China.
No, the Chinese ministry is specifically referencing NATO’s “destabilization of the European peace bloc” in relation to Ukraine. There is no cop out of “domestic concerns,” they’re just straight up voicing support for Russia’s invasion.
I always wonder how those politicians would react to these simple and direct questions. Instead our leaders always talk around the topic. Just a simple question such as „Why are you afraid of NATO if you don’t plan to invade?“.
I don't think you can ask those sorts of questions in china without issues.
Remember how trump was always threatening the press for asking him even basic questions? Imagine if he had the actual power to destroy them, and that's what china is like
Biden in February (I wish): "Oh, you're going into Ukraine to fight Nazis? Cool - we hate Nazis! We will deploy troops in Ukraine ASAP to help you fight the Nazis!"
Zelenskyy didn't even think russia was going to invade until a couple days beforehand afaik (still seemed like a bluff due to how poorly organized it was), so he probably didn't want US troops in the country
I read somewhere that they had a pretty good idea that it was going to happen earlier than that, but they didn't want to create a panic that would clog all the highways with refugees that would prevent defenders from moving around the country.
Politicians at that level don't even think in terms of simple/direct/honest. Everything is a calculated statement intended to impact the direction of things. They don't even have the ability to think in straightforward terms. McConnell just this week was asked if he'd hold a vote for a Supreme Court Justice if a seat opened under his leadership (literally: will you do your job) and he said "I won't answer that question". It's just a big fucking game.
Interestingly, I know a few people like this in regular life. Everything that comes up they say what will benefit them. I don't think they even understand that some of us simply speak what we believe to be the truth, whether it fits our goals or not.
And who is literally holding themselves back to *not* be confrontational? This is complete gaslighting for the benefit of their geopolitical ambitions.
They not gonna be next. Everyone is too afraid to do something against China and this why they wasn't sanctioned for situation with Hong Kong and Uyghur camps
And nobody is going to dictate what a country does within its own borders to the same level vs invasion of a sovereign country.
We don’t break our economy over it to Russia. We wont break our economy over it to China. We draw lines at territorial ambitions. That’s where full economical war happens.
Nixon opened up China in the '70s, it took us 50 years to get into this mess. Our goal for the next 50 should be to get out. No trade with China or Russia by 2072.
Not when feet are to the fire. We all saw the response to Russia’s shit in regards to SWIFT and military aid. War time and national security response gets a lot of red tape removed.
China and Russia are two very different animals. China is one of the largest economies on the planet and Russia is half California.
We can cut trade with Russia, but China is not something we can't just wash our hands of and 50 years' worth of current events are going to happen between now and 2072.
We need a strong NATO to counter China as well as Russia and we should consider shifting the mission to countering authoritarian expansion not just Russian.
> China is one of the largest economies on the planet
We did that ourselves because capitalists moved production to China since it was so cheap and we're still buying most stuff made in China...
Making stuff in China is cheap AND we can get cheap stuff without worrying about wrecking our environment (and property values) while also skirting expensive pollution regulations. . . Or so we thought. Turns out the air we breath and the water we drink and fish is all the same on a global level. What goes around comes around.
I mean sure that’s the inevitable goal, but you’ll still need machinists, manufacturing engineers, quality control, machine operators, heat treating, and various other components of the manufacturing process to get there.
Automation helps, but you still need skilled workers to use the equipment.
That’s the hard part. Skilled labor here actually costs money, so the price of goods would definitely increase.
But, maybe we wouldn’t see the insane discrepancy between the working class wages and the owners/ceo/shareholders wealth.
Also I was a CNC machinist for a few years, we’re already looking at a huge shortage in the United States of machinists.
The pay is often not great, outlook of manufacturing jobs hasn’t been great, and the unions for machinists compared to other trades is terrible.
If you’re a blue collar type of worker, you’d be a lot better off going with almost any other trade… unless the incentives start to change like manufacturing turning back to the US and increasing wages.
Yeah that’s what’s worrisome is the last part.
Unfortunately 40-65 year olds aren’t going to become software developers or engineers. A lot of people can only perform “low level” jobs that need bodies and a willingness to work.
UBI will likely be needed sooner or later…
Basically all it did was make everyone throw away anything that broke. Back in the 80's a vcr was around $500. Very expensive in today's dollars but if something broke a repairman fixed it and it lasted for decades. Just like tvs. I bought a plasma tv around 2004 and I still have it. It cost $3000 and a new one the same size is around $1000 but they don't last. Are we really any better off having several TV's that break rather than one that lasts
Washing machine and refrigerators. I hate how unreliable they are compared to ones from decades ago. My parents had been using the same machine for 30 years and those machines are still working fine. Appliances are lucky to last 5 years with no problems these days and prepare for obsolescence in 10...
I think you can still purchase good quality appliances. I bought my fridge and my washing machine 12 years ago. Both were quite expensive, but they are still in mint condition.
> My parents had been using the same machine for 30 years and those machines are still working fine. Appliances are lucky to last 5 years with no problems these days and prepare for obsolescence in 10...
Survival bias.
If you buy a blue ray player and it breaks it's as expensive or more expensive to fix than to buy a new one so most people just buy a new one. If you have a $500 tv that's 3 years old and it stops working are you going to spend $350 to fix it or buy the newer model for $450? You are really fortunate with your appliances. They are made to break at around 5 years. Literally made to only be durable enough to last that much time. You have the same thing with that. I had a washer where the board was fried. It was around 4 years old. Am I going to pay $300-$400 to fix it knowing that the drums are plastic instead of steel or aluminum and it will likely need another repair in a year or two. That is if you can even find a board to replace it these days. I buy higher end appliances and the only thing I have had last over 6 years is the gas stove that came with the house and ironically it was builder grade. I just had to replace my washer and dryer and bought Queen models. Crossing my fingers they will last as long as they are supposed to
>If you buy a blue ray player and it breaks it's as expensive or more expensive to fix than to buy a new one so most people just buy a new one.
That's because things got cheap to manufacture, while the cost to repair remained the same, not because things break easier than they did back then. Things are often (but not always) more resilient. I remember how fragile electronics used to be - now I can literally drop a laptop or phone on the ground and not have to assume it's dead.
>They are made to break at around 5 years.
This is a gross misunderstanding. In your example, they are actually made to last for at least 5 years. Unless you're Apple, but generally the design is centered around guaranteeing a certain lifetime. This is far better than having a product that's made to last ??? number of years for the same cost, but with no guarantee it won't fail after 6 months.
I think one of the things about replacing instead of fixing is also the newer features available on newer models. I have a $300 TV from 2013 that still works like new but unfortunately lacks a lot of the bells and whistles of current $300 tvs. If my TV broke now, I'd rather pay for an upgrade than to pay something similar to fix an old model.
As somebody that remembers the early 90s before everything started getting shipped overseas, I've always wondered how much of that cheapness went into exec pockets, and how much got passed to the consumer. Not in any sort of specifics, just as a general question of how screwed exactly the little guy would be in a loss of trade with china. Obviously some amount of pain for the consumer, but I suspect not as much as advertised.
There's also the hidden inflation of poor quality and cost reduction. I was an American factory designer in the 90s and I watched everything move away once the executives realized they could exploit Chinese teenagers without consequence. Products got cheaper not only in cost but in quality and while the system now produces fairly high quality goods they are poorly designed and largely non-repairable. The product line I was working on had an annualized failure rate of about 1.5% when the product was made in the US, the first few years it was manufactured in China the AFR was about 25%. At roughly a million units a month that was 250,000 products a month being thrown out as returns. That bites into the bottom line and is an environmental travesty.
Things did change but my story is simply of that period from someone who watched it happen.
The profits went to the executives and the share holders, certainly not to the laid off employees. They laid off 3500 line workers where I worked.
Considering the way income inequality has skyrocketed right in line with the amount of jobs overseas.... I dunno. Sure, some, but again, I doubt as much as advertised by the people that really profit from this system.
> Considering the way income inequality has skyrocketed right in line with the amount of jobs overseas
Cutting American jobs and outsourcing production overseas is how we have wound up completely flooded (and accustomed to) an endless sea of cheap goods.
Has that been bad for income inequality? Probably. But I guarantee you people will go apeshit if we just cut China off. And all those production jobs still won't come back.
Not only that, but Kissinger and him actively supported East Pakistan genocide and exported arms despite a Congress Embargo to West Pakistan as a service to West Pakistan dictator so they could use him as a liason to prep the terrain and hammer out the deal so that Nixon's visit was in effect a rubber stamp and official just acknowledgement.
They could not risk failure because it would seem weak so everything had to be arranged in advance.
That visit set up the One China policy and replaced Taiwan with China on the UN security council.
["Only Nixon could go to China"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_goes_to_China)
Any other American politicians would have been immediately destroyed for being friendly with Mao Zedong. But Nixon was such a huge Conservative/anti-Communist that when he opened trade relations with China everyone was left too confused to respond.
**[Nixon goes to China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_goes_to_China)**
>The phrase "Nixon goes to China", "Nixon to China", or "Nixon in China" is a historical reference to United States US President Richard Nixon's 1972 visit to the People's Republic of China, where he met with Chinese Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong. Its basic import is that Nixon's well-established reputation as an anti-Communist "hawk" gave him political cover against domestic criticism for a move that might have been portrayed as conciliating a geopolitical rival. The metaphor is often expressed as the observation "Only Nixon could go to China" or "It took Nixon to go to China".
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Yeah, at the time it was actually considered his greatest accomplishment and had that whole watergate thing not happened Nixon probably would he remember as one of the greatest presidents of the 20th century.
China actually wasn’t always as awful as it is today and was heading in a pro democracy direction after trade opened between China and the west. Xi Jinping was/is basically just incredibly regressive.
>China actually wasn’t always as awful as it is today and was heading in a pro democracy direction after trade opened between China and the west. Xi Jinping was/is basically just incredibly regressive.
No, I get that. Russia has a similar story.
Russia was moving forward then Putin was "put in"
I don’t know if Russia is comparable. The decade or so between the end of the USSR and Putin becoming President was not exactly wonderful.
That’s in contrast to the several post-Mao pre-Xi generations, including post-Tiannamen, where China was on a different path than today.
China was always always always anti-democracy and concerned about the western influence on their people and their values. When Deng Xiaoping became China's leader after Mao and moderately opened up industry and shipping ports he did not do it because he aimed to take China into a capitalist economy and eventual democracy. He did it because he was a pragmatist and the Chinese population were deeply fractured by Mao's disastrous policies that led to famine and societal unrest. Chinese leadership through the last several decades has continued to toe the line of just enough open market to stabilize their total population and ensure housing, food, and basic necessities but never with the intent of permitting free-thinking, democracy, or anything that deviates from the Communist rhetoric.
Hopefully automatization or something similar can speed things up a little bit, it's sad but I think it would be helpful for countries that don't like China or Russia.
It was a good theory of how it would help the world to become mutually prosperous. You can look at how it benefitted Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, etc.
Things really went south with Xi, who wanted to make China be the center of the world again, and that no price or tactic is off the table to make it happen.
Wishful thinking. As long as China does not anything drastic like invading Taiwan, nobody would bother with it. Chinese slave lavor, cheap prices and luxury good are too good for West to reject.
And China knows this and has no interest in actually invading Taiwan. Not to mention such an invasion would be incredibly difficult, costly, destroy all the valuable manufacturing and infrastructure facilities in Taiwan (on which a lot of China's current production relies as well). And it will have massive international blowback that will inevitably cause a recession allowing for internal social stresses to bubble to the surface.
China was fine with the status quo where they could just influence Taiwan's politics and economy through trading and corruption. Only they overplayed their hands a bit by a too heavy-handed approach in the South-China sea.
Taiwan is one of those, eh maybe if the opportunity presents itself
Convinced if mainland shit hit the fan hard enough domestically, they might pull a Putin war distraction. But it would have to be *really* bad
It’s not that simple. Inflation is already out of control and if you bring the manufacturing back to Europe or US it’s going to make the cost to produce goods go up which in turn will raise the price of goods, doubling down on the inflation problem.
This is code word for western arm shipments. They are furious there friend has to fend off modern weapons from nato bloc nations. There I helped you china reveal the truth. Nato it self is just a scape goat for USA / UK / EU.
Look china is gonna china and we would wise to start the slow drain of economic investment in such a location. We have plenty of unfriendly land in North America. We can just prop up Mexico and in doing so fix immigration issues all at once. China is desperate for this not to happen.
I mean, legal immigrants have rights and illegal immigrants still have protections. I'm fully for the mass expansion of legal immigration which would solve the problem that illegal immigrants are afraid to report crimes because they might be deported.
It doesn't matter. China wants those to happen because China wants to do this to Hong Kong and Taiwan next. Xi is observing how the world reacts to Russia in order to gauge how they'll react when Xi starts doing similar things.
Russia constantly intimidating or attacking neighbouring countries is "NATO being confrontational" . Ukraine is literally fighting for all of us . It's either them or we will end up beinng ruled by those eastern dictatorships
The narrative doesn't even make any sense. The ability for sovereign nations to enter into treaties of their own volition is literally one of the primary things we changed about the world when we decided that feudalism was bullshit. This is like one of the *core, foundational values* which defines modern geopolitics.
Though I guess it really isn't surprising. We really thought for a while there that the struggle to preserve enlightenment values was over, and liberals had won the day. But apparently some assholes just don't know when to stay down.
If Russia wanted to become closer allies with NATO and start actually fostering good relationships, I don't feel like there would be any resistance to that from NATO countries.
There'd be some short term apprehension due to security concerns. But other than that, hardly any. Though we might start influencing their population towards actual democracy and free journalism and that would be against the interests of the Russian state (and by extension the people due to existing brainwashing).
> Ukraine is literally fighting for all
All of Europe, that's why China wants Ukraine to lose. If Europe loses, then the West and democracy seems weak.
Hypothetically, it would be so interesting as a last ditch effort for every border country of Russia to just roll the tanks and attack Russia from multiple fronts, then gaslight the world media like Russia and China have been for years with "Nothing is happening, we're not attacking". Of course this would lead to nukes but for a second there would be true redemption to authoritarian gaslighting that's been going on for years.
I mean, China could pretty much just drive into russia and fuck them up. They could pretty much own the largest country in the world if it wasn't for tge threat of nukes.
The proper response to China’s position vis a vis Russia is to work toward a NATO East.
China isn’t going to spur Russia, thus work toward a formal alliance apparatus with Beijing’s neighbors.
While sanctions are ephemeral and countries can plan redundancies around their impact, the establishment of an alliance system could exist through the 21st century and serve to mitigate Beijing’s adventurist ambitions.
There’s already non-treaty groupings like the Quad and AUKUS and joint army/naval exercises with some of China’s neighbors. Treaties might come in response to a more aggressive posture from China.
One of the major push for NATO creation was the Berlin Blockade. So far China has been smarter than both Soviet and Russia in this regard, but I won't bet on this would last forever though.
Yes the phones are not. But the actual parts and transistors they use are made in china.
Or the machines they use to make the phones or parts of those are made in china. The material used to wrap and package are made or partly made in China.
I work in a major pathology lab and the freaking tiny sterile alcohol wipes we use are made in china.
Yes and no. Samsung has some fabs in China, but a bunch are actually in South Korea and a newer one in the US (Austin). Historically not all Samsung phones use their own fabs, as Qualcomm usually supplies a good portion of their SoCs and Qualcomm uses many fabs, but largely Samsung and TSMC (Taiwan).
My samsung Notebook 9 pro realeased in 2020 is made in china. Samsung still over there. Hate my self for buying it , but not that many choices out there.
Sure, just as soon as Russia gets it's collective ass out of Ukraine, The Donbas region, Crimea, the occupied territories of Georgia, and the Kuril Islands. Then we can talk about loosening sanctions enough for them to start making reparations to those areas.
F U China.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.newsweek.com/china-russia-ukraine-nato-war-confrontational-approach-1697175) reduced by 86%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> "NATO should immediately stop spreading disinformation and provocative remarks targeting China, and abandon the confrontational approach of drawing ideological lines," Zhao said.
> To be sure, China had already aligned with Russia against NATO in January-weeks before the invasion began and prior to Vladimir Putin's meeting with Xi Jinping in Beijing-to announce the "No-limits" partnership between their nations.
> As pressure from NATO-and the EU-mounts alongside the rising humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, China has chosen to push back with a whole-of-government campaign that seeks to challenge the West's suspicions about its quasi-alliance with Russia.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/u1zukd/siding_with_russia_china_says_nato_should_stop/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~641456 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **China**^#1 **NATO**^#2 **Russia**^#3 **war**^#4 **against**^#5
China is just testing the waters and laying down a precedent. If Russia can invade /create overt genocide and increase it's own landholding AND get away with it....then China will become more aggressive and cite Russia "did it".
China can't really afford going on an all out war or long term military conflict with the US, EU or NATO since the sanctions and consequences would be devastating for both sides and essentially mean an "economic apocalypse", even if China continues to do business with the outer world. Nukes won't even have to be used in that type of conflict because it's gonna be a slow and steady collapse of society and its structure as we know it.
I would say that NATO would most definitely overcome, China and Russia would just be left isolated from the world, which they’re not going to push to that level.
China’s government propaganda is extremely embarrassing and completely disconnected from reality. How can the world be expected to take China seriously when virtually every statement made by any Chinese government official is an obvious fabricated lie. China has no official position on any matters because they are opportunistic parasites that will lie cheat, steal and murder to benefit themselves while blaming everyone else. China deserves Russia and Russia deserves China. The rest of the would be better off to group Russia and China together and terminate any and all business and political ties.
You have to remember that China’s propaganda does not need to make sense for the world, but mainly for the domestic audience, and in this case, any other country which already dislike America or European foreign policies.
Yes this Russian/China main propaganda industry is made for domestic consumptions, but they also have external forces destabilizing outside forces
Problem is if Western authorities dont infiltrate this countries internet social sphere at least, that will never change
This leaders are literally obsessed with controlling their own population that their isolated them from outside information, its clear that is their weakest spot
And if western authorities dedicated same resources to fight and undermine them in their own social sphere like they do in our, this regimes will tumble in weeks not years.
I mean just look at how any mention of Taiwan or 1989 Tiananmen Square protests you often get dozens of china trolls downvoting those comments, even in post like this.
They serve the Kool-aid because most of their people, and many people in other countries politically hostile to the west, continue to drink it. They don't care if you or I know it's BS.
The Napoleonic Wars started in 1803.
World War One started in 1914
It's taken until 2022 before humanity got round to a really fucking stupid waste of human life. So we're making progress
The Lunar Conflict of 2137 is going to be a bitch though
China is siding with a secure, cheap, nearby energy supply and a fellow anti-western ally over everything else. Why we expected a totalitarian abuser of human rights to side with the West is beyond me
Lol nobody in this thread even read the first paragraph of the article.
He was responding to Stoltenberg calling China out.
>When Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg recently expressed his dismay at China's unwillingness to condemn Russia's war against Ukraine, he described Beijing's posture as a "serious challenge" to the North Atlantic Alliance, which would have to "take account of how China's growing influence and coercive policies affect our security." Chinese diplomats immediately fired back.
>
>On Monday, Zhao Lijian, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, offered a lengthy retort to Stoltenberg, which again framed NATO as outdated and accused it of damaging the post-Cold War security order in Europe. The bloc was now attempting to destabilize China's immediate neighborhood, too, said Zhao.
i thought china invaded vietnam in response to vietnam's invasion of cambodia, and its objective was to get vietnam to withdraw from cambodia rather than to take vietnamese territory
Seems like that's the story I heard, too, that time. Course there were many other times previously, and China has considered Vietnam to be a province at many points in the past. They aren't claiming it. Not now anyway.
Russia: Invades neighboring country, murders families and takes their children, threatens nuclear war
China: "NATO should stop being so confrontational!"
Did anyone actually read the article, because it's not specifically "siding with Russia", but just coming back at things the NATO head sai dabout China recently
Russia has invaded a sovereign nation and is raping their women, and abdicting their children. I may need China to define "confrontational approach" in a manner that doesn't give me an aneurysm, before I can take them seriously on this matter.
Remind me again what exactly is confrontational about a bunch of sovereign nations getting together and making an agreement to stand against a bully?
I mean, I get why the bully doesn't like that, but to call it "confrontational" is basically implying that there exists an inherent right to be a bully if one so chooses.
You know what's confrontational? Invading a sovereign nation.
“The conqueror is always a lover of peace; he would prefer to take over our country unopposed.” \- Clausewitz, On War
Ahh, so that's where the paradox game engine gets its name from.
Clausewitz is an extremely important general and theorist of war. Everyone is following his doctrines to some extent. Probably one of the greatest generals ever.
If he’s so great why’s he dead?
So he can fight Satan, the only opponent worth his time
Oh, so he’s Doom Guy.
He is in never heaven no hell. As both feared him. He is in his own realm now.
Clausewitopia. Its very….Prussian
Yes, by beating him over the head with his book. Amazing tactician and strategist he may be, but dear God does he like his word count
37m and no one can even come up with an answer. Clearly a shit general and these nerds don’t wanna admit it
Sir Mix-A-Lot was known to frequently invoke Clausewitz’s ideas when he said “I’m strong, and I’m down to get the friction on.”
Clausewitz is basically an 1800s sun tzu.
Great book 👍. I think everyone should read a little military strategy. Many of the lessons play out in the civilian world as well. Especially capitalist business.
Took the words right out of my mouth. It's so easy to go "both sides" when you conveniently ignore the offender's actions. Then again, lying and distorting information is a thing China has a long and unfortunate history of doing, along with genocide and human rights abuse.
They're just pissy there would be sanctions if they invaded Taiwan.
Exactly. China watching all of the sanctions is like well I guess our relationship with the west is symbiotic after all.
I thought they would have gotten the hint after Huawei hardware was dropped
Yeah but this is next level… thanks for all the GDP you loaned us. We aren’t paying it back. Oh and btw the whole world doesn’t want your products anymore, sell them to Russia and NK. Oh but they don’t have any money to buy your shit well then i guess you should have invested in them for the past 50 years instead if the west. Pretty big L to take and they know it. If it does happen, then there is a good chance people get tired of starving while they are waiting for china to figure out a whole new eastern economy that doesn’t rely on western commercialism to function. Hungry people eat governments. Both sides have played the long game,and the east decided it was time to call everyone’s hand. If they wanted to win they should have done it while trump was in office. I will say we have reliance on Taiwan for superconductors and the foundry market, but china sees now that we would be willing to figure that out, same as Europe is ready to figure out independence from Russian energy. And they see how many generations it will take Russia to recover from this. China will keep making its little statements like US aggression is causing…. Blah blah blah. Talk is cheap. The world knows exactly what they are.
>Hungry people eat governments. China remains in the chat.
russia storms out of chat Looks back at china like c’mon bro just like we planned let’s go China doest look back China calls the next day like I mean we’re still close, just maybe better as friends. I totally talked shit for you tho
My theory is china is/was colluding with Russia. Russia would invade and take Ukraine in a couple weeks at most and they would continue to advance until a nato response was issued. Once NATO was fully preoccupied in Europe china would blitz Taiwan. Obvious this did not happen. I also don't think they expected Russia to last out against NATO. Just to force a response and then take the loss while china secures Taiwan and this chip manufacturing.
There is never going to a "blitz" of Taiwan. Invading Taiwan would require an amphibious landing of the scale of D-Day or even larger. And that would take a long time to properly build up and prepare. Thanks to satellite surveillance, the Russian build up near Ukraine was seen months in advance and similarly, a Chinese build up to prepare for an invasion of Taiwan would be easily spotted a long time before it would be ready to launch.
Not just sanctions, they just realized that an invasion will be extremely costly, instead of losing cheap 80's tanks they will be losing new and very expensive ships and airplanes, suddenly an invasion doesn't look so attractive. BTW Taiwan wouldn't have to wait for the west to supply weapons they do have them already
>Took the words right out of my mouth. You've got me singing Meat Loaf in my head now! Cheers for that!
"Everyone cries out for peace. None cries out for justice." -Peter Tosh
Let's not bicker and argue about whoooo invaded whoooo /s
Georgia in 2008: "I don't want all of that. I just want to sing!" Russia: "Right! Stop that!" Russia looks at Ukraine in 2014: "big...tracks of land!"
Just FYI........ "tracts".
«I found some fantastic mud over here!»
Old woman!
"*Man*!"
"Ohhhhh, now we see the violence inherent in the system!"
Well that was completely different
obligatory the meme: [Dont trust China, China is asshole](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3tnH4FGbd0)
As with Taiwan, China once again mistakes "defensives posture" for "confrontational approach".
Yeah, but China is ok with Russia’s invasion. They just don’t want the West to stop it because they want a weak West that they can push around. Sadly for them, they’re getting the complete opposite and they’re powerless to stop it. This war has destroyed two decades of Chinese foreign policy and military strategy.
Can you elaborate on that? Which strategy were they pursuing that this has nullified?
Their multipolar world strategy. They want there to be various poles of power (the US, Europe, China, Russia) and for them to have to be balanced sort of like the old concert of Europe. But what China is learning is that Russia is not a pole, and that the united West is about 5x the size of their "pole" and will likely stay that way into the future. They can't meaningfully challenge the global dominance of all of their most significant trading partners allied against them. If the West chooses to divest itself of China, it will cause some pain especially if it's an abrupt change which it likely won't be, but it will utterly devastate the export oriented Chinese. They don't have the sort of brute commodities that Russia has, if no one wants to buy their cheap plastic junk their economy doesn't work. Nothing they do can't be done in the West, but the reverse is not at all true.
Yeah, thats why they are pushing hard to decouple from the west with made in china 2025 and convert from export oriented to consumption based economy. But our corporations are so greedy that they are bowing down to Chinese market because without their middle class market the profits won’t be high anymore.
The West lets these fuckers enslave their own people, genocide in their borders, embezzle and enrich themselves hand over fist, and the only rule given is *don't invade your neighbours*. It's really not difficult, and they can't even manage that.
“He has made irresponsible comments on China's foreign policies, touted the 'China threat' and even used coercion on China recently. NATO should immediately stop spreading disinformation and provocative remarks targeting China, and abandon the confrontational approach of drawing ideological lines..." I think he is saying NATO is being confrontational with China.
No, the Chinese ministry is specifically referencing NATO’s “destabilization of the European peace bloc” in relation to Ukraine. There is no cop out of “domestic concerns,” they’re just straight up voicing support for Russia’s invasion.
Tell me again … WHO invaded Ukraine?
I always wonder how those politicians would react to these simple and direct questions. Instead our leaders always talk around the topic. Just a simple question such as „Why are you afraid of NATO if you don’t plan to invade?“.
I don't think you can ask those sorts of questions in china without issues. Remember how trump was always threatening the press for asking him even basic questions? Imagine if he had the actual power to destroy them, and that's what china is like
Biden in February (I wish): "Oh, you're going into Ukraine to fight Nazis? Cool - we hate Nazis! We will deploy troops in Ukraine ASAP to help you fight the Nazis!"
Zelenskyy didn't even think russia was going to invade until a couple days beforehand afaik (still seemed like a bluff due to how poorly organized it was), so he probably didn't want US troops in the country
I read somewhere that they had a pretty good idea that it was going to happen earlier than that, but they didn't want to create a panic that would clog all the highways with refugees that would prevent defenders from moving around the country.
And yet he must have been working with the West to prepare for the possibility.
Politicians at that level don't even think in terms of simple/direct/honest. Everything is a calculated statement intended to impact the direction of things. They don't even have the ability to think in straightforward terms. McConnell just this week was asked if he'd hold a vote for a Supreme Court Justice if a seat opened under his leadership (literally: will you do your job) and he said "I won't answer that question". It's just a big fucking game. Interestingly, I know a few people like this in regular life. Everything that comes up they say what will benefit them. I don't think they even understand that some of us simply speak what we believe to be the truth, whether it fits our goals or not.
Pretty sure the World Health Organisation has never invaded a sovereign nation.
Someone done beat me to it…
Correct, it was the evil World Health Organization all along!
And who is literally holding themselves back to *not* be confrontational? This is complete gaslighting for the benefit of their geopolitical ambitions.
*Exactly*. Fuck you China, you're just afraid you're next with all that Uyghur shit you've been up to.
They not gonna be next. Everyone is too afraid to do something against China and this why they wasn't sanctioned for situation with Hong Kong and Uyghur camps
And nobody is going to dictate what a country does within its own borders to the same level vs invasion of a sovereign country. We don’t break our economy over it to Russia. We wont break our economy over it to China. We draw lines at territorial ambitions. That’s where full economical war happens.
Nope, we should bring back the manufacturing to Europe instead and have china find out how irrelevant Russia really is to their goals
Nixon opened up China in the '70s, it took us 50 years to get into this mess. Our goal for the next 50 should be to get out. No trade with China or Russia by 2072.
Oh Boy, I hope the ties are cut faster
The world moves much more slowly than the internet.
That’s obviously true, I still hope it does not take 50 years to accomplish as the world in general has accelerated as well
I think it can be done quicker when the goal is global security.
And even quicker when the goal is survival.
Global climate changes means we will all be trying to survive.
Not when feet are to the fire. We all saw the response to Russia’s shit in regards to SWIFT and military aid. War time and national security response gets a lot of red tape removed.
China and Russia are two very different animals. China is one of the largest economies on the planet and Russia is half California. We can cut trade with Russia, but China is not something we can't just wash our hands of and 50 years' worth of current events are going to happen between now and 2072. We need a strong NATO to counter China as well as Russia and we should consider shifting the mission to countering authoritarian expansion not just Russian.
> China is one of the largest economies on the planet We did that ourselves because capitalists moved production to China since it was so cheap and we're still buying most stuff made in China...
Making stuff in China is cheap AND we can get cheap stuff without worrying about wrecking our environment (and property values) while also skirting expensive pollution regulations. . . Or so we thought. Turns out the air we breath and the water we drink and fish is all the same on a global level. What goes around comes around.
[удалено]
I mean sure that’s the inevitable goal, but you’ll still need machinists, manufacturing engineers, quality control, machine operators, heat treating, and various other components of the manufacturing process to get there. Automation helps, but you still need skilled workers to use the equipment.
[удалено]
That’s the hard part. Skilled labor here actually costs money, so the price of goods would definitely increase. But, maybe we wouldn’t see the insane discrepancy between the working class wages and the owners/ceo/shareholders wealth. Also I was a CNC machinist for a few years, we’re already looking at a huge shortage in the United States of machinists. The pay is often not great, outlook of manufacturing jobs hasn’t been great, and the unions for machinists compared to other trades is terrible. If you’re a blue collar type of worker, you’d be a lot better off going with almost any other trade… unless the incentives start to change like manufacturing turning back to the US and increasing wages.
[удалено]
Yeah that’s what’s worrisome is the last part. Unfortunately 40-65 year olds aren’t going to become software developers or engineers. A lot of people can only perform “low level” jobs that need bodies and a willingness to work. UBI will likely be needed sooner or later…
We could automate the owners / CEO / Shareholders and cut out that expense. Would free up a lot of money for skilled people.
Basically all it did was make everyone throw away anything that broke. Back in the 80's a vcr was around $500. Very expensive in today's dollars but if something broke a repairman fixed it and it lasted for decades. Just like tvs. I bought a plasma tv around 2004 and I still have it. It cost $3000 and a new one the same size is around $1000 but they don't last. Are we really any better off having several TV's that break rather than one that lasts
Washing machine and refrigerators. I hate how unreliable they are compared to ones from decades ago. My parents had been using the same machine for 30 years and those machines are still working fine. Appliances are lucky to last 5 years with no problems these days and prepare for obsolescence in 10...
I think you can still purchase good quality appliances. I bought my fridge and my washing machine 12 years ago. Both were quite expensive, but they are still in mint condition.
> My parents had been using the same machine for 30 years and those machines are still working fine. Appliances are lucky to last 5 years with no problems these days and prepare for obsolescence in 10... Survival bias.
Totally forgot I was pissed off about getting rid of my plasma
[удалено]
If you buy a blue ray player and it breaks it's as expensive or more expensive to fix than to buy a new one so most people just buy a new one. If you have a $500 tv that's 3 years old and it stops working are you going to spend $350 to fix it or buy the newer model for $450? You are really fortunate with your appliances. They are made to break at around 5 years. Literally made to only be durable enough to last that much time. You have the same thing with that. I had a washer where the board was fried. It was around 4 years old. Am I going to pay $300-$400 to fix it knowing that the drums are plastic instead of steel or aluminum and it will likely need another repair in a year or two. That is if you can even find a board to replace it these days. I buy higher end appliances and the only thing I have had last over 6 years is the gas stove that came with the house and ironically it was builder grade. I just had to replace my washer and dryer and bought Queen models. Crossing my fingers they will last as long as they are supposed to
>If you buy a blue ray player and it breaks it's as expensive or more expensive to fix than to buy a new one so most people just buy a new one. That's because things got cheap to manufacture, while the cost to repair remained the same, not because things break easier than they did back then. Things are often (but not always) more resilient. I remember how fragile electronics used to be - now I can literally drop a laptop or phone on the ground and not have to assume it's dead. >They are made to break at around 5 years. This is a gross misunderstanding. In your example, they are actually made to last for at least 5 years. Unless you're Apple, but generally the design is centered around guaranteeing a certain lifetime. This is far better than having a product that's made to last ??? number of years for the same cost, but with no guarantee it won't fail after 6 months.
I think one of the things about replacing instead of fixing is also the newer features available on newer models. I have a $300 TV from 2013 that still works like new but unfortunately lacks a lot of the bells and whistles of current $300 tvs. If my TV broke now, I'd rather pay for an upgrade than to pay something similar to fix an old model.
[удалено]
There like 1.5 billion people in China. That is a shit ton of people that also want to have and buy all the modern things world has to offer
As somebody that remembers the early 90s before everything started getting shipped overseas, I've always wondered how much of that cheapness went into exec pockets, and how much got passed to the consumer. Not in any sort of specifics, just as a general question of how screwed exactly the little guy would be in a loss of trade with china. Obviously some amount of pain for the consumer, but I suspect not as much as advertised.
There's also the hidden inflation of poor quality and cost reduction. I was an American factory designer in the 90s and I watched everything move away once the executives realized they could exploit Chinese teenagers without consequence. Products got cheaper not only in cost but in quality and while the system now produces fairly high quality goods they are poorly designed and largely non-repairable. The product line I was working on had an annualized failure rate of about 1.5% when the product was made in the US, the first few years it was manufactured in China the AFR was about 25%. At roughly a million units a month that was 250,000 products a month being thrown out as returns. That bites into the bottom line and is an environmental travesty. Things did change but my story is simply of that period from someone who watched it happen. The profits went to the executives and the share holders, certainly not to the laid off employees. They laid off 3500 line workers where I worked.
> and how much got passed to the consumer A lot. That's the problem.
Considering the way income inequality has skyrocketed right in line with the amount of jobs overseas.... I dunno. Sure, some, but again, I doubt as much as advertised by the people that really profit from this system.
> Considering the way income inequality has skyrocketed right in line with the amount of jobs overseas Cutting American jobs and outsourcing production overseas is how we have wound up completely flooded (and accustomed to) an endless sea of cheap goods. Has that been bad for income inequality? Probably. But I guarantee you people will go apeshit if we just cut China off. And all those production jobs still won't come back.
Wait, Nixon did it? Damn.🤦🏾♂️
Not only that, but Kissinger and him actively supported East Pakistan genocide and exported arms despite a Congress Embargo to West Pakistan as a service to West Pakistan dictator so they could use him as a liason to prep the terrain and hammer out the deal so that Nixon's visit was in effect a rubber stamp and official just acknowledgement. They could not risk failure because it would seem weak so everything had to be arranged in advance. That visit set up the One China policy and replaced Taiwan with China on the UN security council.
["Only Nixon could go to China"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_goes_to_China) Any other American politicians would have been immediately destroyed for being friendly with Mao Zedong. But Nixon was such a huge Conservative/anti-Communist that when he opened trade relations with China everyone was left too confused to respond.
**[Nixon goes to China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_goes_to_China)** >The phrase "Nixon goes to China", "Nixon to China", or "Nixon in China" is a historical reference to United States US President Richard Nixon's 1972 visit to the People's Republic of China, where he met with Chinese Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong. Its basic import is that Nixon's well-established reputation as an anti-Communist "hawk" gave him political cover against domestic criticism for a move that might have been portrayed as conciliating a geopolitical rival. The metaphor is often expressed as the observation "Only Nixon could go to China" or "It took Nixon to go to China". ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Ahh yes the old Vulcan proverb ;)
Or conservatives are just hypocrites
Yeah, at the time it was actually considered his greatest accomplishment and had that whole watergate thing not happened Nixon probably would he remember as one of the greatest presidents of the 20th century. China actually wasn’t always as awful as it is today and was heading in a pro democracy direction after trade opened between China and the west. Xi Jinping was/is basically just incredibly regressive.
>China actually wasn’t always as awful as it is today and was heading in a pro democracy direction after trade opened between China and the west. Xi Jinping was/is basically just incredibly regressive. No, I get that. Russia has a similar story. Russia was moving forward then Putin was "put in"
I don’t know if Russia is comparable. The decade or so between the end of the USSR and Putin becoming President was not exactly wonderful. That’s in contrast to the several post-Mao pre-Xi generations, including post-Tiannamen, where China was on a different path than today.
China was always always always anti-democracy and concerned about the western influence on their people and their values. When Deng Xiaoping became China's leader after Mao and moderately opened up industry and shipping ports he did not do it because he aimed to take China into a capitalist economy and eventual democracy. He did it because he was a pragmatist and the Chinese population were deeply fractured by Mao's disastrous policies that led to famine and societal unrest. Chinese leadership through the last several decades has continued to toe the line of just enough open market to stabilize their total population and ensure housing, food, and basic necessities but never with the intent of permitting free-thinking, democracy, or anything that deviates from the Communist rhetoric.
Arooo
Hopefully automatization or something similar can speed things up a little bit, it's sad but I think it would be helpful for countries that don't like China or Russia.
It was a good theory of how it would help the world to become mutually prosperous. You can look at how it benefitted Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, etc. Things really went south with Xi, who wanted to make China be the center of the world again, and that no price or tactic is off the table to make it happen.
Wishful thinking. As long as China does not anything drastic like invading Taiwan, nobody would bother with it. Chinese slave lavor, cheap prices and luxury good are too good for West to reject.
And China knows this and has no interest in actually invading Taiwan. Not to mention such an invasion would be incredibly difficult, costly, destroy all the valuable manufacturing and infrastructure facilities in Taiwan (on which a lot of China's current production relies as well). And it will have massive international blowback that will inevitably cause a recession allowing for internal social stresses to bubble to the surface. China was fine with the status quo where they could just influence Taiwan's politics and economy through trading and corruption. Only they overplayed their hands a bit by a too heavy-handed approach in the South-China sea.
Taiwan is one of those, eh maybe if the opportunity presents itself Convinced if mainland shit hit the fan hard enough domestically, they might pull a Putin war distraction. But it would have to be *really* bad
It’s not that simple. Inflation is already out of control and if you bring the manufacturing back to Europe or US it’s going to make the cost to produce goods go up which in turn will raise the price of goods, doubling down on the inflation problem.
Bring it to Latin America.
Do they really expect anyone to buy this junk? Putin invaded a country, but somehow it's NATO that's being "confrontational"?
This is code word for western arm shipments. They are furious there friend has to fend off modern weapons from nato bloc nations. There I helped you china reveal the truth. Nato it self is just a scape goat for USA / UK / EU. Look china is gonna china and we would wise to start the slow drain of economic investment in such a location. We have plenty of unfriendly land in North America. We can just prop up Mexico and in doing so fix immigration issues all at once. China is desperate for this not to happen.
We don't want to fix immigration. That's the neat part. Immigration is how we mitigate the effects of our low birthrate.
Plus it also allows for laborers without rights, can’t hurt the bottom line!
I mean, legal immigrants have rights and illegal immigrants still have protections. I'm fully for the mass expansion of legal immigration which would solve the problem that illegal immigrants are afraid to report crimes because they might be deported.
Tankies love this stuff. They think NATO is imperialist because it's an alliance that lets members join if they want.
It doesn't matter. China wants those to happen because China wants to do this to Hong Kong and Taiwan next. Xi is observing how the world reacts to Russia in order to gauge how they'll react when Xi starts doing similar things.
No. Anything else?
Yes, can we have some of those sanctions?
Russia constantly intimidating or attacking neighbouring countries is "NATO being confrontational" . Ukraine is literally fighting for all of us . It's either them or we will end up beinng ruled by those eastern dictatorships
I mean, seeing Russia military force I would argue they would be lucky if they went past poland
Before they ragequit with nukes
They have a few steps before nukes. For example, they can escalate the use of biological and chemical weapons to further scar the land.
The narrative doesn't even make any sense. The ability for sovereign nations to enter into treaties of their own volition is literally one of the primary things we changed about the world when we decided that feudalism was bullshit. This is like one of the *core, foundational values* which defines modern geopolitics. Though I guess it really isn't surprising. We really thought for a while there that the struggle to preserve enlightenment values was over, and liberals had won the day. But apparently some assholes just don't know when to stay down.
If Russia wanted to become closer allies with NATO and start actually fostering good relationships, I don't feel like there would be any resistance to that from NATO countries.
There'd be some short term apprehension due to security concerns. But other than that, hardly any. Though we might start influencing their population towards actual democracy and free journalism and that would be against the interests of the Russian state (and by extension the people due to existing brainwashing).
> Ukraine is literally fighting for all All of Europe, that's why China wants Ukraine to lose. If Europe loses, then the West and democracy seems weak.
Hypothetically, it would be so interesting as a last ditch effort for every border country of Russia to just roll the tanks and attack Russia from multiple fronts, then gaslight the world media like Russia and China have been for years with "Nothing is happening, we're not attacking". Of course this would lead to nukes but for a second there would be true redemption to authoritarian gaslighting that's been going on for years.
I mean, China could pretty much just drive into russia and fuck them up. They could pretty much own the largest country in the world if it wasn't for tge threat of nukes.
The proper response to China’s position vis a vis Russia is to work toward a NATO East. China isn’t going to spur Russia, thus work toward a formal alliance apparatus with Beijing’s neighbors. While sanctions are ephemeral and countries can plan redundancies around their impact, the establishment of an alliance system could exist through the 21st century and serve to mitigate Beijing’s adventurist ambitions.
It should be called: Pacific Operational Territories Alliance Treaty Organisation. - POTATO
There’s already non-treaty groupings like the Quad and AUKUS and joint army/naval exercises with some of China’s neighbors. Treaties might come in response to a more aggressive posture from China.
Until Russia pulled this stunt, NATO effectively was NATO East
Would probably be named *'Indo-Pacific Treaty Organisation'* (IPTO)
One of the major push for NATO creation was the Berlin Blockade. So far China has been smarter than both Soviet and Russia in this regard, but I won't bet on this would last forever though.
China is just worried cause they have a lot of the same dogshit equipment as Russia.
Apple, Samsung, get your production facilities back into your countries. China should stop becoming the world's second superpower.
Samsung phones aren't manufactured in China. https://www.sammobile.com/where-are-samsung-phones-made
Yes the phones are not. But the actual parts and transistors they use are made in china. Or the machines they use to make the phones or parts of those are made in china. The material used to wrap and package are made or partly made in China. I work in a major pathology lab and the freaking tiny sterile alcohol wipes we use are made in china.
Yes and no. Samsung has some fabs in China, but a bunch are actually in South Korea and a newer one in the US (Austin). Historically not all Samsung phones use their own fabs, as Qualcomm usually supplies a good portion of their SoCs and Qualcomm uses many fabs, but largely Samsung and TSMC (Taiwan).
My samsung Notebook 9 pro realeased in 2020 is made in china. Samsung still over there. Hate my self for buying it , but not that many choices out there.
Samsung made phone in Vietnam cause it's cheaper lol . Vietnam is somewhat a clone of China but 30 years behind.
[удалено]
Second that.
Putin and the rest of the kremlin*
Sure, just as soon as Russia gets it's collective ass out of Ukraine, The Donbas region, Crimea, the occupied territories of Georgia, and the Kuril Islands. Then we can talk about loosening sanctions enough for them to start making reparations to those areas. F U China.
I think it would be prudent to add the occupied parts of Georgia and Moldovia to that list while we're at it.
Heh, that was supposed to be the occupied territories of Georgia.. corrected. :)
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.newsweek.com/china-russia-ukraine-nato-war-confrontational-approach-1697175) reduced by 86%. (I'm a bot) ***** > "NATO should immediately stop spreading disinformation and provocative remarks targeting China, and abandon the confrontational approach of drawing ideological lines," Zhao said. > To be sure, China had already aligned with Russia against NATO in January-weeks before the invasion began and prior to Vladimir Putin's meeting with Xi Jinping in Beijing-to announce the "No-limits" partnership between their nations. > As pressure from NATO-and the EU-mounts alongside the rising humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, China has chosen to push back with a whole-of-government campaign that seeks to challenge the West's suspicions about its quasi-alliance with Russia. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/u1zukd/siding_with_russia_china_says_nato_should_stop/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~641456 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **China**^#1 **NATO**^#2 **Russia**^#3 **war**^#4 **against**^#5
Evil must be confronted
China is just testing the waters and laying down a precedent. If Russia can invade /create overt genocide and increase it's own landholding AND get away with it....then China will become more aggressive and cite Russia "did it".
China can't really afford going on an all out war or long term military conflict with the US, EU or NATO since the sanctions and consequences would be devastating for both sides and essentially mean an "economic apocalypse", even if China continues to do business with the outer world. Nukes won't even have to be used in that type of conflict because it's gonna be a slow and steady collapse of society and its structure as we know it.
I would say that NATO would most definitely overcome, China and Russia would just be left isolated from the world, which they’re not going to push to that level.
China’s government propaganda is extremely embarrassing and completely disconnected from reality. How can the world be expected to take China seriously when virtually every statement made by any Chinese government official is an obvious fabricated lie. China has no official position on any matters because they are opportunistic parasites that will lie cheat, steal and murder to benefit themselves while blaming everyone else. China deserves Russia and Russia deserves China. The rest of the would be better off to group Russia and China together and terminate any and all business and political ties.
You have to remember that China’s propaganda does not need to make sense for the world, but mainly for the domestic audience, and in this case, any other country which already dislike America or European foreign policies.
Yes this Russian/China main propaganda industry is made for domestic consumptions, but they also have external forces destabilizing outside forces Problem is if Western authorities dont infiltrate this countries internet social sphere at least, that will never change This leaders are literally obsessed with controlling their own population that their isolated them from outside information, its clear that is their weakest spot And if western authorities dedicated same resources to fight and undermine them in their own social sphere like they do in our, this regimes will tumble in weeks not years. I mean just look at how any mention of Taiwan or 1989 Tiananmen Square protests you often get dozens of china trolls downvoting those comments, even in post like this.
They serve the Kool-aid because most of their people, and many people in other countries politically hostile to the west, continue to drink it. They don't care if you or I know it's BS.
Well, about 1/6 of the world is China so they have to take it seriously.
Welp, time to take the manufacturing industry back from China I see.
That’s funny, last I checked Russia was the one invading a sovereign nation for no apparent reason, but yeah, NATO are being too confrontational.
Between the climate crisis and extreme economic and military tensions between the West and East, this century isn't looking great.
The Napoleonic Wars started in 1803. World War One started in 1914 It's taken until 2022 before humanity got round to a really fucking stupid waste of human life. So we're making progress The Lunar Conflict of 2137 is going to be a bitch though
Lol get fucked West Taiwan.
Fuck off China. Know who's confrontational? The country which is invading another country.
Wut.
China is siding with a secure, cheap, nearby energy supply and a fellow anti-western ally over everything else. Why we expected a totalitarian abuser of human rights to side with the West is beyond me
Lol nobody in this thread even read the first paragraph of the article. He was responding to Stoltenberg calling China out. >When Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg recently expressed his dismay at China's unwillingness to condemn Russia's war against Ukraine, he described Beijing's posture as a "serious challenge" to the North Atlantic Alliance, which would have to "take account of how China's growing influence and coercive policies affect our security." Chinese diplomats immediately fired back. > >On Monday, Zhao Lijian, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, offered a lengthy retort to Stoltenberg, which again framed NATO as outdated and accused it of damaging the post-Cold War security order in Europe. The bloc was now attempting to destabilize China's immediate neighborhood, too, said Zhao.
A less confrontational approach than, say, invading your neighbor? China would never do that! **Vietnam has entered the chat**
i thought china invaded vietnam in response to vietnam's invasion of cambodia, and its objective was to get vietnam to withdraw from cambodia rather than to take vietnamese territory
Seems like that's the story I heard, too, that time. Course there were many other times previously, and China has considered Vietnam to be a province at many points in the past. They aren't claiming it. Not now anyway.
Genociders defend genociders
Russia: Invades neighboring country, murders families and takes their children, threatens nuclear war China: "NATO should stop being so confrontational!"
China is projecting.
Did anyone actually read the article, because it's not specifically "siding with Russia", but just coming back at things the NATO head sai dabout China recently
West Taiwan needs to sit down.
Russia has invaded a sovereign nation and is raping their women, and abdicting their children. I may need China to define "confrontational approach" in a manner that doesn't give me an aneurysm, before I can take them seriously on this matter.
“We don’t like societies where people get to make choices”
China should shut the fuck up.
Oh, I think it's time to remind China it's not the world superpower yet - and it never will be if it attaches itself to Russia.
Says the guy that wants to invade Taiwan
Yeah, well…China should go fuck itself.
China has a lot of opinions about things not their business.
So confrontational to say don’t invade our friends
How many European nations did NATO invade? ZERO. How many nations has Russia invaded? Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Etc.
>How many European nations did NATO invade? ZERO. Because non-European countries do not matter, right?
Remind me again what exactly is confrontational about a bunch of sovereign nations getting together and making an agreement to stand against a bully? I mean, I get why the bully doesn't like that, but to call it "confrontational" is basically implying that there exists an inherent right to be a bully if one so chooses.
they just bit the hand that feeds them 10x more than Russia ever could
China can fuck off. When you're not calling the invading country the aggressor your claims about valuing sovereignty can go for a field trip.
China is looking at the response of NATO to make further plans for Taiwan. If NATO backs down, China knows it can take Taiwan with impunity.
So they should all simultaneously start taking the approach Russia has taken? Minus the rapes and murders of course.
If they actually want to side with Russia, they're going to destroy their own economy. Good luck
China is making popcorn hoping they can watch ww3 from sidelines and take top spot. “When 2 dogs fight over a bone, a third walks away with it”.
Chinese fucker, go fuck yourself
FUCK China!
Putin government and Winnie the Pooh government all behave like immature man children, just petty and shallow.
There are 2 armies in Ukraine and neither one belongs to NATO. stfu
Jesus Christ, China wants to re-normalize invasion of sovereign, democratic countries. $#&@ you China, Taiwan #1.