The best way to defeat Trump in this election: China cancels all trade war tariffs on American exports

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

10 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

 

 

Thanks, Tom.  I hope it was in time.  Oil Price should have a gift shop.  Little barrels of black gooey oil and TDS stickers would be good starts.  Maybe some ball caps, Big Gusher pens (handle with care!), carbon offsets.  And socks.  Everybody needs socks!  LOL!

 

Oh, and I've got a great idea for pen-light triggers:  Activate to shine an image of Trump on the wall!

[Enric + 3]

On 5/3/2020 at 7:02 AM, Jan van Eck said:

The Americans are going to separate themselves from China.  Nothing that China can do is going to deflect that.  Is China going to dismantle the Communist Party, remove itself from Tibet, remove itself from Xingjiang and fre the Uighurs,  give up the South China Sea, renounce intentions of seizing Taiwan, and start to behave?  No chance.  So, why should the Americans (or anyone else) have any truck with that crowd? 

"Trade War truce?"  There isn't going to be any trade, forget about those guys.  Will China disintergrate internally without the cash influx from sales to the Americans?  Probably.    Nobody cares about China any more.  China is done. 

Is the USA going to dismantle its two-party system and become a real multy-party democracy like the european nations? 

Is the USA going to free its central and western territories and give them back to natives and mexicans (this is what you're asking China to do with Tibet and Xinjiang)? 

Is the USA going to dismantle its 800 military bases worldwide and stop to bomb and invade other nations? Will the USA start to behave like a civilized nation rather than a war criminal? 

If the answer is no, why do you expect that China stops to defend its interests and give up its territories to please americans? 

Btw China has 1400 millions inhabitants which means an enormous domestic market still developing which not only is an enormous opportunity for chinese companies but it attracts many companies from every country of the world, above all from Europe which want to sell their products to chinese consumers. 

Do you really think that US multinationals would willingly give up such an enormous and promising market and accept the Trumpian autarky? 

Do you really think that the US companies could withstand the competition of chinese, european and japanese companies if the chinese, europeans and japanese had 1400 millions more 

customers than them? 

Edited May 7, 2020 by Enric
Used autarchy rather than autarky

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

16 minutes ago, Enric said:

Is the USA going to dismantle its two-party system and become a real multy-party democracy like the european nations? 

Is the USA going to free its central and western territories and give them back to natives and mexicans (this is what you're asking China to do with Tibet and Xinjiang)? 

Is the USA going to dismantle its 800 military bases worldwide and stop to bomb and invade other nations? Will the USA start to behave like a civilized nation rather than a war criminal? 

If the answer is no, why do you expect that China stops to defend its interests and give up its territories to please americans? 

Btw China has 1400 millions inhabitants which means an enormous domestic market still developing which not only is an enormous opportunity for chinese companies but it attracts many companies from every country of the world, above all from Europe which want to sell their products to chinese consumers. 

Do you really think that US multinationals would willingly give up such an enormous and promising market and accept the Trumpian autarchy? 

Do you really think that the US companies could withstand the competition of chinese, european and japanese companies if the chinese, europeans and japanese have 1400 million more potential customers than them? 

Welcome, Enric.  Interesting points.  I'm sure @Jan van Eck will be back online one of these days to answer you.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

5 hours ago, BradleyPNW said:

In Trump's case, easily manipulated = actively looking to engage in corruption. There's no bottom with the guy. 

Which orifice did you pull this little unsubstantiated nugget from?

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

 

”Is the USA going to dismantle its two-party system and become a real multy-party democracy like the european nations?“

 

I sincerely hope we NEVER follow the European model!

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Welcome, Enric.  Interesting points.  I'm sure @Jan van Eck will be back online one of these days to answer you.

I doubt it.  You know the responses to these points. Generlly:  No. 

[BradleyPNW + 282]

3 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Which orifice did you pull this little unsubstantiated nugget from?

With your boy Donald one might look at his string of bankruptcies, refusals to pay contractors for work completed, fines paid for his Trump University scam, state dissolution of his charity for misuse of funds, paying a porn star hush money in a scheme that broke campaign finance laws, etc. to recognize an extensive pattern of corruption. Oh, and his frequent bragging that he engages in corruption, such as:

“As a businessman and a very substantial donor to very important people, when you give, they do whatever the hell you want them to do,” Trump told The Wall Street Journal in July 2015. “As a businessman, I need that.”

and his admissions in front of his red hat jamborees...

"These super PACs are a disaster, by the way, folks. Very corrupt….There is total control of the candidates, I know it better than anybody that probably ever lived….I know it so well because I was on both sides of it, I was on the other side all my life and I’ve always made large contributions. And frankly, I know the system better than anybody else, and I’m the only one up here that’s going to be able to fix that system, because that system is wrong."

Anywho, did you happen to read that history article I linked about the Electoral College? I'd like to think you corrected your misunderstanding of that topic as well. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

^^ Knock yourself upside the head.  I think there's a broken record up there where you brain should be.

[BradleyPNW + 282]

^^ Might want to loosen the strap a little on your maga hat. 

[SUZNV + 1,197]

There are cons and pros between EU and US . Politic parties is the balance between fear and greed, trust and distrust their government.

For logical mind non emotional independent voters anywhere, vote for their benefits:

-In EU and mega cities in US like SF, NY, Chicago, houses are really expensive and risky to have, naturally you have to rent, which is an expenditure. If you don't inherit house from parents,don't depend on your children, naturally your old age have to depends on pension and welfare system, which need a strong central power  government to allocate resources and you have to trust them and need more parties to stop them corrupted, you don't have much debt to worry about. No one left behind in the pyramid of incomes. The cons is it will be harder for you to save, or to be rich, to claim on top of the food chain, have to be attached from your government, even a good one want to reform the country economics don't have much room for them to change because no party or voter want to take risk. Low risk low return and have to be happy with any party in power. Your fear make you attached to your Gov and less motivation to work or attract investment (for profit, not for geopolitical purpose).

-US conservatives conserve to the US old way, less regulation, less taxes (domestically) , weak central government. Risk taker, more risk more return. Given that if you have no inheritance or  no children look after you at old age,   if you can have a house and a good saving, you don't need to be so depend on 401k or government when you retire. You need gun to defend your hard work against from thieves, robbers or even governments.The cons is you in debt for not too big  mortgage, you may get bankruptcy (mortgage or sometimes healthcare). In rural city, the gap between rich are very narrow. None care if you are rich and none look down you if you are poor. Poor or rich can have a house if works hard. Jobs are everywhere if you are not picky (good job opportunities are more easier to find, per capita)

The problems are people from mega cities when they move to conservative states, because they cannot compete or want to own a house, not apartment, or want mortgage instead of rent, they bring their fear with them because that is what they are missing their state's welfare but they want to enjoy the greed of the free to be rich than the local people. They slowly turn these state cities in more hierarchy and less equality. Not many people with family want to move to mega cities though, but the young people mostly want to go to big city.

Off course  blue states with mega cities pay more taxes to the federal. They pay  higher rent, higher cost of livings so they will have to get higher salary to maintain the living standards. While the federal taxes are based on income state wise. It does not mean their average living standards or  their average "values" are better. If you remove all the state taxes and real estate cost, all the prices should be not much different. GDP PPP per capita should be the same across states, the  average people in Red states can save more, enjoy more life style and benefit from federal tax brackets.

Average people in Blue states are forced to pay more, live in a less living standard, no one forced them to live there. Blue states welfare don't perform well with Corona virus or criminals control although they collects more tax and claim their systems are more advance and less gun. If you pay more tax and more advance than people pay less tax, then the richer are more advance than you already, they contribute more to the country already, why should you complain? This is typical double standard, you complain because you think they should give more to you because they are born rich or earn many times more than you. Many rich people don't like to live in small city, because they have their business in the mega cities and how can they show off being rich to people who don't care.

You don't like equality then you go to mega cities states. If you like more equality, you have to take higher risk and don't ask more for welfare.The average people who want the state government to look after themselves then move to blue state and vice versa. US is a free country for moving. 

This also means 2 parties is kind of enough. In each party will have factions in the spectrum, like Bernie Sander and Biden with primary election. It simply EU way since WW2 or US old way.

-China has an absolute power system as well, so naturally EU don't see them as a threat like US conservatives. But Chinese people don't trust their government and that's why they stick to real estates buble and personal saving and their children (they don't trust the Western Democracy as well as their views are you tried to take their future savings, or making their real estate price non- accessible ). Chinese government is better with playing fear and greed games for western world. Of course they know their government can take all away or collapse the economy but what choice do they have? If they want freedom they can just move to a democracy countries.

The spectrum like this (Democracy or Republic or  Communism).

Left-More government control & regulation                                                                                                                    Right-less gov control& regulation

China                                                                              EU                                                                                     US

Funnily the citizens in the left always think their systems are more superior and more happy than the citizens in the right but most people strive to go left to right and not many people do the reverse. Been their, done that. I have lived in far left, middle (not EU) and far right and I seems like to go right because I started from 0(or negative) and super greedy. I don't hate myself in the past as well. Trust or don't Trust politicians with your future is always a question. More party more politicians playing in short terms for their next election only.

                        

Edited May 7, 2020 by SUZNV

[Marcin2 + 725]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[sollostyles + 1]

On 5/2/2020 at 11:02 PM, Jan van Eck said:

There is no logical reason for the American voters to wish to reject a second term of Donald Trump  (assuming he is the candidate, which is likely, and assuming that his wife does not insist he retire from politics),  The USA has effectively a two-party system.  The opposition party is the democrats, and they seem incapable of mounting a credible candidate.  Wht logical reason would any voter have, to vote for a Democrat candidate, when all they can trot out is some recycled Clintonite?  Who needs those people?  Nobody.

The Chinese have lost all credibility among Ameerican voters.  An argument could be made that the corn growers in Iowa might be angry that the market for their crop, and for soybeans, has evaporated, but remember that Mr. Trump can win an election without the delegate votes of Iowa in the Electoral College.  The key states are those that "flipped" from Dem to Repub in the last election:   Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Florida, and Iowa.  That brought Trump to 303 electoral votes, and you only need 270 to win.  Trump can lose Iowa. 

The Americans are going to separate themselves from China.  Nothing that China can do is going to deflect that.  Is China going to dismantle the Communist Party, remove itself from Tibet, remove itself from Xingjiang and fre the Uighurs,  give up the South China Sea, renounce intentions of seizing Taiwan, and start to behave?  No chance.  So, why should the Americans (or anyone else) have any truck with that crowd? 

"Trade War truce?"  There isn't going to be any trade, forget about those guys.  Will China disintergrate internally without the cash influx from sales to the Americans?  Probably.    Nobody cares about China any more.  China is done. 

Your AMERIGANCE is unbelievable ! Yes because China actually gives a F#$%! Imagine if China stuck it's nose in every SINGLE thing USA did ? Demanding this and that. USA needs to shut up and fix their country. Start with education.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

4 hours ago, sollostyles said:

Your AMERIGANCE is unbelievable ! Yes because China actually gives a F#$%! Imagine if China stuck it's nose in every SINGLE thing USA did ? Demanding this and that. USA needs to shut up and fix their country. Start with education.

I thank you for your kind words.  You might wish to keep in mind that I am not American.  

As to your comment about "fixing the country" and "starting with education,"  whatever that means, I would respond by pointing out that in the US system, education is emphatically NOT a Federal responsibility nor a Federal jurisdiction.  It is reserved to the individual States, both as to curriculum and to financing  The USA is the "United" of "States," and all powers not placed with the Federal Government are expressly "reserved to the States, or to the People." 

As to your idea that the "USA needs to shut up,"  I would remind you that the entire planet looks to the USA for both guidance and for moral authority. And that includes the people of China:  I remind you that the demonstrators in Hong Kong, by the hundreds of thousands, begged the USA to send troops in to protect Hong Kong, to "save us" from Beijing.  Now, what does that tell you? 

[Marcin2 + 725]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[BradleyPNW + 282]

Today, Trump had the DOJ drop charges against Mike Flynn despite the fact Mike pleaded guilty in a court of law. That fits the common American use of the term corrupt. Career case prosecutors didn't make that decision, Donald did and had Barr carry it out. 

However, I have a question about the claim, "Donald is too rich to take bribes." If he's too rich to take bribes why does he steal from his charities and scam people with Trump University? Normally, a wealthy narcissist would avoid behavior that degrades his reputation.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, BradleyPNW said:

Today, Trump had the DOJ drop charges against Mike Flynn despite the fact Mike pleaded guilty in a court of law. That fits the common American use of the term corrupt. Career case prosecutors didn't make that decision, Donald did and had Barr carry it out. 

Not really.  What has happened is that an internal memo of the FBI has surfaced, and it states as follows  (with analysis by a commenter):

"The immediate predicate of the government’s move to dismiss the charges today was the release in April of FBI notes about its interviews with Flynn. Among the notes, an unidentified FBI employee wrote, “What is our goal? Truth/admission or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?” The notes are the latest example of dubious FBI behavior. As a recent Justice Department inspector-general report found, the FBI has repeatedly abused rules for obtaining warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. As I have written repeatedly during the Trump administration, the FBI’s long record of abuse means that its statements cannot be taken at face value; the bureau will look out for its own interests, and break the rules to do so if it must."

It becomes apparent that the FBI attempted to push Flynn into a trap, to get him to "lie" on the record.  that, in US law, is known as "entrapment," and is a pernicious form of government misconduct that automatically leads to dismissal of all charges.  In the USA, the government  (here, the police in the form of the FBI) cannot "set you up" to commit a criminal act that you would not otherwise commit, if not so entrapped.  the criminal act in question was being structured to so-called "lie" to the FBI itself.  the prosecutors were caught up in the web of deceit being spun by the FBI, in its quest to damage Trump, who had a faling-out with FBI boss Comey (and fired him). 

The Donald did NOT make any "decision" to "drop charges;"  it was the FBI misconduct that tainted the case and made no other outcome possible. 

The reason that the US law has evolved this way is that, in the USA, the maxim is:  "It is better for 99 guilty men to go free, than one innocent man to go to jail."  Now, you can disagree with that concept, and it is ignored in places such as Egypt and China, but that is the way it is inside the USA.  As an aside, I ob serve that that is NOT the maxim in neighboring Canada, where it is considered a "privilege of citizenship" tobe wrongfully convicted when the cops lie on the witness stand and you spend 25 years in jail for a crime that you have nothing to do with.  And in Canada, you cannot sue for compensation, as it is considered a "duty of citizenship."  So, countries from the same "Mother," the UK, can develop entirely different philosophies about policemen lying and entrapping the citizens. 

You have a nice day, now. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

The best way to defeat Trump in this election: China cancels all trade war tariffs on American exports

No, the best way to defeat Trump would be to field a candidate who puts forth a plan to rebuild America without spending her into the ground. It would also be a plus if they not only studied the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, and followed them as written.

If the opposing party can not provide such a candidate, and get people to vote for him or her, then I believe Trump is re-elected as there is no viable alternative.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

If the opposing party can not provide such a candidate, and get people to vote for him or her, then I believe Trump is re-elected as there is no viable alternative.

With the proviso, of course, that Mr. Trump runs as a candidate, is either not opposed in the Primary or is able to defeat any challengers in the Primary, and then goes on to the General Election and obtains more than 270 electoral votes.  In American politics, nothing is a slam-dunk.  That said, your analysis that the Democrats seem unable to get out of their mindset and go find a credible, viable candidate, will spell their doom. 

At this point, the Republicans could run the Mayor of Hoboken, New Jersey and defeat a Democrat in the general election.  Pathetic!

[BradleyPNW + 282]

52 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Not really.  What has happened is that an internal memo of the FBI has surfaced, and it states as follows  (with analysis by a commenter):

The Donald did NOT make any "decision" to "drop charges;"  it was the FBI misconduct that tainted the case and made no other outcome possible. 

The reason that the US law has evolved this way is that, in the USA, the maxim is:  "It is better for 99 guilty men to go free, than one innocent man to go to jail."  Now, you can disagree with that concept, and it is ignored in places such as Egypt and China, but that is the way it is inside the USA.  As an aside, I ob serve that that is NOT the maxim in neighboring Canada, where it is considered a "privilege of citizenship" tobe wrongfully convicted when the cops lie on the witness stand and you spend 25 years in jail for a crime that you have nothing to do with.  And in Canada, you cannot sue for compensation, as it is considered a "duty of citizenship."  So, countries from the same "Mother," the UK, can develop entirely different philosophies about policemen lying and entrapping the citizens. 

You have a nice day, now. 

So the problem with your take is the federal prosecutor Brandon Van Grack withdrew from the case when he learned what Trump and Barr were up to. He wanted no part of that drug deal. Which means, yes, Donald had Barr drop the charges.

No, it wasn't entrapment. Flynn lied to the FBI. He knew he lied. He made a plea deal when he got caught. It's very simple, do not lie to the FBI. Flynn was a general and ex-NSA. Trump said he fired Flynn for lying to VP Mike Pence. Certainly seems like Flynn had a predilection for lying even in the absence of FBI pressure, right? That's some pretty weak sauce to claim the FBI tricked ex-general ex-NSA Flynn into lying. 

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

10 minutes ago, BradleyPNW said:

So the problem with your take is the federal prosecutor Brandon Van Grack withdrew from the case when he learned what Trump and Barr were up to. He wanted no part of that drug deal. Which means, yes, Donald had Barr drop the charges.

No, it wasn't entrapment. Flynn lied to the FBI. He knew he lied. He made a plea deal when he got caught. It's very simple, do not lie to the FBI. Flynn was a general and ex-NSA. Trump said he fired Flynn for lying to VP Mike Pence. Certainly seems like Flynn had a predilection for lying even in the absence of FBI pressure, right? That's some pretty weak sauce to claim the FBI tricked ex-general ex-NSA Flynn into lying. 

 

So you just disregard the recently uncovered evidence?

[SUZNV + 1,197]

If Trump could had the DOJ drop charges against Flynn he could have done it 3 years ago. 

Most of US and EU leaders are responsible for the position of China now, despite their leaders's crimes, and now most of their attitude is :"China is too strong and nothing we can do now or we have to be careful not hurt our economies or we shouldn't be racist". EU even softened their reports on Covid19. Only Trump and his staffs alone stood up against China and with the risk of US economy and traitors in his back (Muller,Barr ,Dem etc.) and now was criticized for his ego.  Xi doesn't need to be narcissistic when some Chinese hurts his ego and Europe leaders treated Xi exactly the same way they treated Hitler. Maybe EU need leaders with big ego not salesman.

How was US image before Trump with Obama, Bush son,Clinton, Bush father? Clinton's economy was good because his term started 2 years after the cold war ,and he was a kind of founding father of China's modern economy. Because both he and Bush believe the goodness would come out from CCP.

US did okay with its CPI, given it has a big population:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

I think public lobbying is okay for transparency instead of lobbying in the dark. Anti corruption Laws need to be along side with Transparency to be supervised.

Edited May 8, 2020 by SUZNV

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,554]

11 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

So you just disregard the recently uncovered evidence?

Not disregard more in realm of a alternate reality. I live in a large population of this new progressive movement,if one can slow them down enough to think thru something of this nature they literally go into some kind of emotional trauma. It needs to be seen to believed. 

Less than a year ago the progressive community went after a social intergration legislation that effected the middle upper class of liberal's. It was quite a event, there were more than a few clashes is the verbiage I'll use..Imagine a bunch of alley cats suddenly meeting...hunched down in a attack mode and just twitchy and glaring for a fight.

Actually the old libs won the battle, no more forced intergration and at the same time Antifia left the metro plex...it just silently went away.

They do come together only to resist Trump he is a primordial fear for the progressives...and a big annoyance for the traditional liberal. 

 

[0R0 + 6,251]

18 hours ago, Enric said:

Is the USA going to dismantle its two-party system and become a real multy-party democracy like the european nations? 

Is the USA going to free its central and western territories and give them back to natives and mexicans (this is what you're asking China to do with Tibet and Xinjiang)? 

Is the USA going to dismantle its 800 military bases worldwide and stop to bomb and invade other nations? Will the USA start to behave like a civilized nation rather than a war criminal? 

If the answer is no, why do you expect that China stops to defend its interests and give up its territories to please americans? 

Btw China has 1400 millions inhabitants which means an enormous domestic market still developing which not only is an enormous opportunity for chinese companies but it attracts many companies from every country of the world, above all from Europe which want to sell their products to chinese consumers. 

Do you really think that US multinationals would willingly give up such an enormous and promising market and accept the Trumpian autarky? 

Do you really think that the US companies could withstand the competition of chinese, european and japanese companies if the chinese, europeans and japanese had 1400 millions more 

customers than them? 

The European system is not political but Bureaucratic because the system is always fractured without pre-determined compromise within large parties. It obtains all of its stability from the continuation of  the bureaucracy which is above politics and often directs it rather than the other way round. They even formed a union of bureaucracies in the form of the EC as a non-compete permanent entrenchment beyond direct political control.  

China has no domestic demand to speak of in just 10 years. Its main demographic is its baby boomers who will be half retired by 2025. Its Millennial generation is smaller and its central age cohort is 32 this year. Their Gen Z is  smaller than that. High school graduation rates in China were 24% in 2016. Great line workers and cleaners. Not a middle class dominated society. 

China's "market" is only temporarily open to foreign firms. They come, the are forced to manufacture there, they get ripped off and copies of their products far outsell their own. Then those bootlegs leak out of China to harm their sales internationally. Finally, SAFE, the forex authority in China does not let them take money out of the country. The value of their sales in China is purely a theoretical bookeeping entry, not necessarily more than 0. May impress investors who buy into the Caymans holding company for Alibaba which doesn't even disclose the actual ownership structure. 

Perhaps when China is finally abandoned by the CCP leadership after it is done leeching its economic potential then the US can start letting go its military and naval over-stretch. I don't think you would like the chaos that ensues. As it happens, trends in the US towards isolationism would have Americans cheer for that. The in short order, Russia will split Poland and Hungary and perhaps Romania with Germany. Turkey will expand to Syria Greece and seeral Balkan countries, and make an attempt at Iraq, Iran will try to hit Saudi, and Japan and Australia will join with other regional naval powers to sink the Chinese navy. The subsharan nations will starve to death sending a wave of 200 million refugees to pillage Africa in their desperation. Piracy will rule the seas outside of the small handful of nations in the US free trade zone. UK Korea Japan Australia and perhaps India and whomever in ASEAN would be willing to pay into the system. The US would want Argentina and France as well, but there is no clear sign they are on board right now. 

Since the US is pretty much all there is from the West that CAN carry out a way, it is clear that other Western nations have no clue what defending their trading routes and their own domestic land mass entails. Considering their military histories, US transgressions (how dare they fire at people that fire against them) will seem but pale imitations. 

I call BS  on your post and suggest you get a re-education outside of the Chinese camps.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,554]

13 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

The European system is not political but Bureaucratic because the system is always fractured without pre-determined compromise within large parties. It obtains all of its stability from the continuation of  the bureaucracy which is above politics and often directs it rather than the other way round. They even formed a union of bureaucracies in the form of the EC as a non-compete permanent entrenchment beyond direct political control.  

China has no domestic demand to speak of in just 10 years. Its main demographic is its baby boomers who will be half retired by 2025. Its Millennial generation is smaller and its central age cohort is 32 this year. Their Gen Z is  smaller than that. High school graduation rates in China were 24% in 2016. Great line workers and cleaners. Not a middle class dominated society. 

China's "market" is only temporarily open to foreign firms. They come, the are forced to manufacture there, they get ripped off and copies of their products far outsell their own. Then those bootlegs leak out of China to harm their sales internationally. Finally, SAFE, the forex authority in China does not let them take money out of the country. The value of their sales in China is purely a theoretical bookeeping entry, not necessarily more than 0. May impress investors who buy into the Caymans holding company for Alibaba which doesn't even disclose the actual ownership structure. 

Perhaps when China is finally abandoned by the CCP leadership after it is done leeching its economic potential then the US can start letting go its military and naval over-stretch. I don't think you would like the chaos that ensues. As it happens, trends in the US towards isolationism would have Americans cheer for that. The in short order, Russia will split Poland and Hungary and perhaps Romania with Germany. Turkey will expand to Syria Greece and seeral Balkan countries, and make an attempt at Iraq, Iran will try to hit Saudi, and Japan and Australia will join with other regional naval powers to sink the Chinese navy. The subsharan nations will starve to death sending a wave of 200 million refugees to pillage Africa in their desperation. Piracy will rule the seas outside of the small handful of nations in the US free trade zone. UK Korea Japan Australia and perhaps India and whomever in ASEAN would be willing to pay into the system. The US would want Argentina and France as well, but there is no clear sign they are on board right now. 

Since the US is pretty much all there is from the West that CAN carry out a way, it is clear that other Western nations have no clue what defending their trading routes and their own domestic land mass entails. Considering their military histories, US transgressions (how dare they fire at people that fire against them) will seem but pale imitations. 

I call BS  on your post and suggest you get a re-education outside of the Chinese camps.

You do not see a conflict between Iran and Turkey? How could Iran tolerate Turkey in Iraq?

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

25 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

You do not see a conflict between Iran and Turkey? How could Iran tolerate Turkey in Iraq?

For Turkey to ‘get into Iraq’, they’ll have to go through the Kurds first. Do they really want to do that and suffer an ongoing guerrilla war in their own border?