US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

[burd]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

BEIRUT (AP) — At least 43 people were killed Saturday when a car bomb went off in a busy market in a rebel-held Syrian town along the Turkish border, activists and rescue workers said.

The explosion ripped through the central market in the town of Azaz in the northern province of Aleppo, damaging a government building and local court house as well. Rami Abdurrahman, the head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring group, said those killed included six opposition fighters. He said the explosion was caused by a rigged water or fuel tanker, which explains the large blast and high death toll.

This is complex shyt, and we can only hope Trump and his minions are up to the task. Hopefully, it's tweetsolvable.

 

[walrus]

Many, many planes of war flew in and out of bangor today. Closest airport to europe, guard refueling airport. Iran?

 

[Kepler]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

Many, many planes of war flew in and out of bangor today. Closest airport to europe, guard refueling airport. Iran?

We just did a big deployment to Germany. Maybe they were coming back?

 

[joecct]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

We just did a big deployment to Germany. Maybe they were coming back?

They're going after the person at the helm of the Jadeites!

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

Here's a pretty cool Global Peace Index. Too bad its pretty much bunk.

First, with half the world's global military spending, a similar amount of its nuclear capability, and probably more than half of its military arms exports...I don't know that I'd call the US neutral as its posed here. Second, China if possible is worse. They threaten all their neighbors on a regular basis while supporting the world's biggest warmonger in NK, and have a large number of prerequisites to allow for a sustainable peace. Seems somewhat political.

http://www.realclearlife.com/news/2...t-reveals-peaceful-countries-eye-opening-map/

 

[Kepler]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

Second, China if possible is worse. They threaten all their neighbors on a regular basis while supporting the world's biggest warmonger in NK

I would not say China "threatens" anybody with a couple exceptions. (1) They've never acknowledged that Taiwan is an independent country -- they consider them a civil war rebellion. (2) There are Tibetans who want independence and the Chinese have always responded to that with an iron boot.

The Chinese have been non-expansionist going on 2000 years. Their game is the opposite: "You want to invade us? Fine, we surrender. In two generations the people you leave here as occupiers will have become us and we will only be stronger."

The Yellow Peril is a US contractor narrative to keep the gravy train rolling.

I can't see how we're not red on that map. We're been the Invader-in-Chief for more than a century -- regardless of whether one thinks it was partly or even wholly justified, there's no arguing it. We are what our record says we are.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

I would not say China "threatens" anybody with a couple exceptions. (1) They've never acknowledged that Taiwan is an independent country -- they consider them a civil war rebellion. (2) There are Tibetans who want independence and the Chinese have always responded to that with an iron boot.

The Chinese have been non-expansionist going on 2000 years. Their game is the opposite: "You want to invade us? Fine, we surrender. In two generations the people you leave here as occupiers will have become us and we will only be stronger."

The Yellow Peril is a US contractor narrative to keep the gravy train rolling.

I can't see how we're not red on that map. We're been the Invader-in-Chief for more than a century -- regardless of whether one thinks it was partly or even wholly justified, there's no arguing it. We are what our record says we are.

I'm guessing its a 2016 version rather than a last century one...which for the US makes your conclusion correct, but more for my rationale.

I'm of the opinion China is more belligerent than you're making them out to be and more so than say Brazil or Thailand (with whom they're categorized). China has implicitly threatened war multiple times over Taiwan and backstops explicit threats of nuclear war from North Korea. They are also militarizing islands in the So China sea as we speak.

 

[aparch]

Many, many planes of war flew in and out of bangor today. Closest airport to europe, guard refueling airport. Iran?

A co-worker said his nephew had to cut his Christmas leave short and catch a flight back to San Diego for deployment to South Korea. All the nephew was told was "you'll get your orders when you land in Korea."

So maybe just a step up in activity with the Presidential handoff in a week?

 

[St. Clown]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

I'm guessing its a 2016 version rather than a last century one...which for the US makes your conclusion correct, but more for my rationale.

I'm of the opinion China is more belligerent than you're making them out to be and more so than say Brazil or Thailand (with whom they're categorized). China has implicitly threatened war multiple times over Taiwan and backstops explicit threats of nuclear war from North Korea. They are also militarizing islands in the So China sea as we speak.

China's actually constructing new islands in the South China Sea for the purpose of militarizing them, though they denied militarizing them continuously until they were presented with satellite photos from the US and other international parties that we all knew what the Chinese were doing.

 

[Kepler]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

I'm guessing its a 2016 version rather than a last century one...which for the US makes your conclusion correct, but more for my rationale.

I'm of the opinion China is more belligerent than you're making them out to be and more so than say Brazil or Thailand (with whom they're categorized). China has implicitly threatened war multiple times over Taiwan and backstops explicit threats of nuclear war from North Korea. They are also militarizing islands in the So China sea as we speak.

Meh. Imagine how we'd feel if China had a navy 10 times ours and kept portions of it on permanent stand-by in the Gulf of Mexico. China definitely wants to assert its control over the East China Sea. If we're going to draw our line in the sand (waves?) at 12 nautical miles from their coast, we're the Harkonen, not they.

If you're worried about the Chinese geting uppity after 300 years of white colonialism just wait until the Africans get their act together. That's going to be something to see, especially in a solar power world where they will have a HUGE home ice advantage. At least we have New Mexico. I dunno what the Krauts are gonna do...

 

[Kepler]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

China's actually constructing new islands in the South China Sea for the purpose of militarizing them, though they denied militarizing them continuously until they were presented with satellite photos from the US and other international parties that we all knew what the Chinese were doing.

IINM China is building those islands so they can claim their territory is larger so they can dominant the trade lanes near their coast. They're putting bases on them to, um, dissuade our carrier forces and subs from being perennially in their face.

I'll worry when they militarize Bermuda.

 

[Kepler]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

A co-worker said his nephew had to cut his Christmas leave short and catch a flight back to San Diego for deployment to South Korea. All the nephew was told was "you'll get your orders when you land in Korea."

So maybe just a step up in activity with the Presidential handoff in a week?

It makes sense that we go on alert whenever we do a change of administrations. You don't want anybody to get the idea that it's a vulnerable time. Especially not the nutjob in Pyongyang. Terrible wars have started because one side has miscalculated.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

IINM China is building those islands so they can claim their territory is larger so they can dominant the trade lanes near their coast. They're putting bases on them to, um, dissuade our carrier forces and subs from being perennially in their face.

I'll worry when they militarize Bermuda.

The worry isn't for US safety, but China's neighbors in the (Yellow) Sea are worried about their commerce being disrupted by the aggressive tactics. Last I knew, Duterte has really said anything positive about China's growing influence in local shipping. And that guy is nuttier than Trump.

 

[Kepler]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

The worry isn't for US safety, but China's neighbors in the (Yellow) Sea are worried about their commerce being disrupted by the aggressive tactics. Last I knew, Duterte has really said anything positive about China's growing influence in local shipping. And that guy is nuttier than Trump.

Well, the world order is changing already. We're going broke maintaining a global economic empire that benefits us (and by "us" I mean rich people who bribe American politicians, as opposed to rich people who bribe British or French politicians). In the future, China and India will have a piece of the action.

The only way we're going to maintain a world where Americans earn $50 an hour and Chinese earn 50 cents an hour is to bomb them back a decade and saddle them with a compliant client state government that sells their resources out to our corporations at rock bottom prices. And that is a strategy. We did it in the Middle East for 75 years and that certainly hasn't come back to bite us at all.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

China's actually constructing new islands in the South China Sea for the purpose of militarizing them, though they denied militarizing them continuously until they were presented with satellite photos from the US and other international parties that we all knew what the Chinese were doing.

Reminds me of this one part of Under Siege 2, where Dane talks about what people know between the US and China...

 

[St. Clown]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

Reminds me of this one part of Under Siege 2, where Dane talks about what people know between the US and China...

They made a second one? Did Erin Eleniak get bigger implants, is that why they made a sequel?

ETA: Erica? I forget her name. Baywatch Bimbo #3, I think that was the role to originally make her famous.

 

[Kepler]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

They made a second one? Did Erin Eleniak get bigger implants, is that why they made a sequel?

ETA: Erica? I forget her name. Baywatch Bimbo #3, I think that was the role to originally make her famous.

Erika, not Erin.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

Well, the world order is changing already. We're going broke maintaining a global economic empire that benefits us (and by "us" I mean rich people who bribe American politicians, as opposed to rich people who bribe British or French politicians). In the future, China and India will have a piece of the action.

The only way we're going to maintain a world where Americans earn $50 an hour and Chinese earn 50 cents an hour is to bomb them back a decade and saddle them with a compliant client state government that sells their resources out to our corporations at rock bottom prices. And that is a strategy. We did it in the Middle East for 75 years and that certainly hasn't come back to bite us at all.

Peace is measured by threats to any peoples/nations outside a country's borders, not strictly whether we will have Chinese troops in Iowa (although we might make an exception for that).

Nothing we will do will keep the income gap between the US and others from closing. While it would have been different in the 20th century, war is not in our best economic interest as an economic solution any more. In large part, that because the US (along with Northern Europe) are not the only economic engines.

Neither should global economic disparity of a $50/50 cent kind of approach be our goal. We should be fine with economic competition and designing strategies to defeat or take advantage of that competition. In other words, a $70/hour vs. $50/hour ratio is better than a $50/50 cent per hour ratio for the US. Don't hide, compete. In its areas of competency, nobody is within a galaxy of the US.

 

[Kepler]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

In its areas of competency, nobody is within a galaxy of the US.

Which areas do you have in mind? I don't get the feeling that Japan and the first division of the EU are much if at all behind the US in any given field. The US has both depth and breadth, while individual competitor nations to this point have only depth or, with the sleeping giants China and India, breadth.

But since we were talking about China, their issue is that their political and economic systems are contradictory -- the strength of one is lethal to the other. They are eventually going to have to choose unless they can come up with something new under the sun.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: US Foreign Policy: The Wogs Begin at Calais

Which areas do you have in mind? I don't get the feeling that Japan and the first division of the EU are much if at all behind the US in any given field. The US has both depth and breadth, while individual competitor nations to this point have only depth or, with the sleeping giants China and India, breadth.

Cutting edge technology/innovation, content and high end services. Any field has individual competitors that are somewhere in the mix - but this is company level, not country level. In a broadbased manner of speaking, the US is in its own league in the industries served by Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, LinkedIn, Kickstarter, Hollywood, McKinsey, silicon valley tech start ups. We don't make stuff, we make the world more productive and entertained.

Europe and Japan are lights out in high end manufacturing - Toyota, BMW, Hugo Boss, Gucci - and delivering culture (through tourism). Apple is also manufacturing, but in true yankee style, is set apart by total solution level innovation. Britain, although smaller, definitely can play with the US in financial services.

China and India are much better at menial services and basic manufacturing and just copy any technology they can. As they are the best at those niches, they are becoming rich...but that doesn't change their comparative weaknesses vis a vis the US.

But since we were talking about China, their issue is that their political and economic systems are contradictory -- the strength of one is lethal to the other. They are eventually going to have to choose unless they can come up with something new under the sun.

Not so sure. It has its pros and cons. They have a billion people and managing projects to support that kind of population can benefit from additional muscle. Its also hard to say what kind of chaos a country like China would be in...if it were to adopt the internally combative style of US government.

Having said that, I am of the belief that they way the Chinese people are treated (including their unrepresentative government) leads to a stifling of ingenuity. So China has a tailwind due to population and a low starting base...but there's a ceiling of just what individual Chinese can do on their own due to creative disadvantages in China itself.