Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 4/17/2017 10:50:49 PM EDT
I’ll bet the Chinese are going nuts.  They've never had to deal with a savvy American in the White House.  

Trump wasn't joking about China during his campaign.  North Korea is simply an opportunity for Trump to blame NK for problems with China. 
And it's certainly not a coincidence that this NK situation is escalating after Trump's meeting with Xi. 

It's unfolding something like this:
1.      Demonstrate you’ll bomb bad guys – complete
2.      Hold friendly bland meetings with Chicoms - complete
3.      Announce that Chicoms agreed to reign in NK, Chicoms agree to new future trade deals - complete
4.      Send in armada, apply military threat/pressure to bad guys in NK (see #1) - complete
5.      NK pushes back and blusters – in progress

Next steps:
6.      Assert that Chicoms are supporting NK, deserve political and trade sanctions
7.      Implement sanctions against Chicoms...
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:01:36 PM EDT
Is this something that just happened in the last 24 hours? The last thing I heard is that President Trump had a productive meeting with the Chinese and is changing his mind about them being currency manipulators and are a lot more friendly than the Russians. What news do you have that contradicts this? In furtherance of this is the news that China just refused to accept a shipment of coal from North Korea (after the Trump meeting) as well as China abstaining from the UN vote to call out Bashar al Assad on the sarin gas attack and their lack of response to the US aircraft carrier entering the South China Sea in response to North Korea's last missile test. Sounds to me that the Chinese may be re-evaluating their position on North Korea in the face of better relations with the US and the fact that China may be losing any control over KIM Jong Un that they had when his father ruled North Korea.

Firing some tomahawk missiles at a Syrian air base (killing no one and only damaging some aircraft) in no way would intimidate China, and I doubt that it had any intention to do so. Intention was to intimidate Assad/North Korea/Iran and various terrorist organizations including Al Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram/Abu Sayyaf/ as well as various others. Nor do I think that the Syrian attack intimated Russia in the least.
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:03:41 PM EDT
Last I heard too, we took over the coal contract that Best Korea lost.
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:04:14 PM EDT
Nope
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:06:03 PM EDT
It makes zero economic sense for the US and China to go to war. Nobody on either side of that is going to be excited about absolutely cratering their economies.
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:07:47 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Is this something that just happened in the last 24 hours? The last thing I heard is that President Trump had a productive meeting with the Chinese and is changing his mind about them being currency manipulators and are a lot more friendly than the Russians. What news do you have that contradicts this? In furtherance of this is the news that China just refused to accept a shipment of coal from North Korea (after the Trump meeting) as well as China abstaining from the UN vote to call out Bashar al Assad on the sarin gas attack and their lack of response to the US aircraft carrier entering the South China Sea in response to North Korea's last missile test. Sounds to me that the Chinese may be re-evaluating their position on North Korea in the face of better relations with the US and the fact that China may be losing any control over KIM Jong Un that they had when his father ruled North Korea.

Firing some tomahawk missiles at a Syrian air base (killing no one and only damaging some aircraft) in no way would intimidate China, and I doubt that it had any intention to do so. Intention was to intimidate Assad/North Korea/Iran and various terrorist organizations including Al Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram/Abu Sayyaf/ as well as various others. Nor do I think that the Syrian attack intimated Russia in the least.
View Quote
Nothing "productive" came out of the meeting with Xi.  No deals. 

You're right, the Syrian missile strike certainly didn't intimidate Russia or China.  But it intimidated NK (and Syria). 
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:07:51 PM EDT
lol
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:09:06 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It makes zero economic sense for the US and China to go to war. Nobody on either side of that is going to be excited about absolutely cratering their economies.
View Quote
You're right.  It's about trade, not war.  Trump never threatened China militarily. 
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:09:07 PM EDT
China needs the US.
China does not need the norks.
All about $$$
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:10:05 PM EDT
Here's a statement from China's Global Times, regarding "military action" by the USA. 

The Chinese will not let something like that happen, especially on the same land where the Chinese Volunteer Army once fought in the early 1950s. It is a land covered with the blood of Chinese soldiers who bravely fought in the early 1950s. Furthermore, if Pyongyang were to be taken by the allied armies of the US and South Korea, it would dramatically change the geopolitical situation in the Korean Peninsula.
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1042957.shtml
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:11:41 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
China needs the US.
China does not need the norks.
All about $$
View Quote
You're right.  It's about the money.  Not war. 
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:12:04 PM EDT
Wait, what happened?
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:14:44 PM EDT
Fake News
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:17:02 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Here's a statement from China's Global Times, regarding "military action" by the USA. 

The Chinese will not let something like that happen, especially on the same land where the Chinese Volunteer Army once fought in the early 1950s. It is a land covered with the blood of Chinese soldiers who bravely fought in the early 1950s. Furthermore, if Pyongyang were to be taken by the allied armies of the US and South Korea, it would dramatically change the geopolitical situation in the Korean Peninsula.
http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1042957.shtml
View Quote
That's an op-ed, not a headline or formal statement of foreign policy.
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:17:30 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Wait, what happened?
View Quote
Trump's setting this situation up like a master negotiator. 
Either the Chinese get rid of Lil Kim, or China will be hit with sanctions for supporting him. 

Win-win scenarios for USA, Lose-lose for China. 
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:20:25 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Nothing "productive" came out of the meeting with Xi.  No deals. 
View Quote
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:21:58 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

That's an op-ed, not a headline or formal statement of foreign policy.
View Quote
Op-ed from the Chinese Communist party's newspaper.  Last I heard, the Chinese Communist party is still in control. 
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:22:48 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Nothing "productive" came out of the meeting with Xi.  No deals. 
https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xLd9DJq2l2VFtu/giphy.gif
What deals?  Enlighten us. 
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:24:06 PM EDT
Definitely fake news. China is shitting themselves that we'll drop as a trade partner.
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:25:57 PM EDT
China is using the delay tactic with the God Emperor.  Xi makes the right noises at their first meeting, but Xi has no intention of enforcing U.N resolution 2270, and will continue to use the "Livelihood" provision, which allows the importation and exportation of goods to/from Best Korea. Unless we are heavily subsidizing the U.S. coal shipments to China, the Chinese State Owned Enterprises cannot afford to pay market prices for coal. Best Korea coal is low quality, very cheap, dirty, but gets the job done.

China is waiting for another world event to distract the U.S. from the Korea issue, then it will be business as usual.  Both South Korea and China would like this issue to be kept status-quo. China believes in "Stability Above All".  South Korea and China do not want a unified Korea, a unified Korea would drastically change South Korea's economy, and China does not want a U.S. ally on it's border.  Best case would be for China to take care of Fat Boy, but they wont.....
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:26:54 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Last I heard too, we took over the coal contract that Best Korea lost.
View Quote
...which lines Soros' pockets. When the coal industry collapsed due to Democratic environmental pressure, Georgie-porgie Soros bought it all up. Or a lot of it.
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:28:44 PM EDT
Not one article in any of the Chinese newspapers about North Korea, only a back page article that talks about the THAAD system in South Korea, and how the system is a threat to the PRC.....
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:30:36 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It makes zero economic sense for the US and China to go to war. Nobody on either side of that is going to be excited about absolutely cratering their economies.
View Quote
This, if anything it will turn into a coolish war.

I strongly suspect that there is are two factions in China, both powerful.The one that is all about economics, opened up China, started giving the people some freedoms, wants to be a solid World power... Then you have the Military who are the hardliners.
Link Posted: 4/17/2017 11:35:46 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
What deals?  Enlighten us. 
View Quote
Neither you nor I will never know.

(In case it went over your head, I'm asserting that you cannot know for a fact that no deal was made - and based on China's sudden change of heart in the field of international diplomacy, I think it's more likely than not that leverage has been applied in one form or another.)
Top Top