Douglas Buckland

The Belt & Road Initiative: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing?

Recommended Posts

On 9/14/2019 at 9:18 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

Is there some reason why respondents are targeting the US in their replies?

The US was not mentioned in my original post, nor does the US have any bearing on the original question put forward.

You've stumbled upon USA derangement syndrome. A common affliction in Europe with origins in Britain. 

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 9/14/2019 at 4:18 PM, Douglas Buckland said:

Is there some reason why respondents are targeting the US in their replies?

The US was not mentioned in my original post, nor does the US have any bearing on the original question put forward.

Because USA is single most agressive country on earth. Its hard to be supporter of US foreign policy after so many regime changes, military interventions, detention centers with with simultaneous MSM propaganda praising the merits of the US for the world.

Russia or China, at least by doing their dirty things, do not proclaim to the world that it is to defend democracy and for the good of the population in the bombed country. 

In my opinion, what annoys people most is American hypocrisy. As if the US frankly said that Iraq was attacked, not because of the mythical weapon of mass destruction but because of the petrodollar defense. Then I would evaluate it differently than in situation Im told that it was all done for the good of the Iraqi or Libyan  people.

It just so happens that the global hegemon is never liked especially when he is as aggressive as the USA for 200 years of its existence. How many years are you able to name when the US was not at war with someone?

It so happens that China has not been bombed by any country for the last 40 years after war with Vietnam

. Maybe that's why some prefer China over the US

Quote

 

Alibaba founder Jack Ma fired a shot at the United States in an interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Ma was asked by CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin about the U.S. economy in relation to China, since President-elect Donald Trump has been talking about imposing new tariffs on Chinese imports.

Ma says blaming China for any economic issues in the U.S. is misguided. If America is looking to blame anyone, Ma said, it should blame itself.

“It’s not that other countries steal jobs from you guys,” Ma said. “It’s your strategy. Distribute the money and things in a proper way.”

He said the U.S. has wasted over $14 trillion in fighting wars over the past 30 years rather than investing in infrastructure at home.

To be sure, Ma is not the only critic of the costly U.S. policies of waging war against terrorism and other enemies outside the homeland. Still, Ma said this was the reason America’s economic growth had weakened, not China’s supposed theft of jobs.

In fact, Ma called outsourcing a “wonderful” and “perfect” strategy.

“The American multinational companies made millions and millions of dollars from globalization,” Ma said. “The past 30 years, IBM, Cisco, Microsoft, they’ve made tens of millions — the profits they’ve made are much more than the four Chinese banks put together. ... But where did the money go?”

He said the U.S. is not distributing, or investing, its money properly, and that’s why many people in the country feel wracked with economic anxiety. He said too much money flows to Wall Street and Silicon Valley. Instead, the country should be helping the Midwest, and Americans “not good in schooling,” too.

“You’re supposed to spend money on your own people,” Ma said. “Not everybody can pass Harvard, like me.” In a previous interview, Ma said he had been rejected by Harvard 10 times.

Along those lines, Ma stressed that globalization is a good thing, but it, too, “should be inclusive,” with the spoils not just going to the wealthy few.

“The world needs new leadership, but the new leadership is about working together,” Ma said. “As a business person, I want the world to share the prosperity together.”

— CNBC’s Anita Balakrishnan contributed to this report.

 

 

Edited by Tomasz
  • Haha 1
  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

10 minutes ago, Tomasz said:
On 9/14/2019 at 3:18 PM, Douglas Buckland said:

The US was not mentioned in my original post, nor does the US have any bearing on the original question put forward.

10 minutes ago, Tomasz said:

Because USA is single most agressive country on earth.

 

And there it is.

Could people occasionaly pull their head out of their ass and look at thread titles?

Actually don't bother. The ridiculousness of this response has had me crying with laughter for several minutes.

Paraphrasing ....

Doug: Why does everyone go on about USA? It's nothing to do with my original question?

Reply: Coz of Iraq.

 

* Still crying. Thankyou.

Edited by DayTrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

with origins in Britain. 

Huh? Look through a bunch of threads. Tell me one post from a Brit that's anti USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2019 at 5:01 AM, ronwagn said:

Having forces in a country is not the same as occupying them. We have not done anything like Russia has done in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. They invaded and annexed land that rightfully belongs to Ukraine. 

China forcefully occupied Tibet and has brutally continued to occupy it. They merely stated that it was part of China, which was a lie.

 Tibet is Burning – China’s Illegal Occupation of Tibet

https://www.topsecretwriters.com/2012/09/tibet-is-burning-chinas-illegal-occupation-of-tibet/

Respectfully, some history is in order.  The USA has annexed many territories in its history: you may start with any First Nation you choose, then expand your scope across the globe. You should seek to understand the true translation of "the Ukraine" and understand why its true name name includes the article. The Crimea as never "rightfully" part of the Ukraine. Kruschev, the leader of the USSR, unilaterally changed the administration of the Crimea from the USSR to the Ukraine. Kruschev's unilateral action violated all laws of the USSR and was effected without a single debate in the Kremlin: factually, he had not the power for this. The Crimea was established as an autonomous territory to be administered by the Ukraine. Thus, the Ukraine has never "rightfully" owned any square inch of the Crimea. Russia did not invade the Crimea: the residents held a referendum and voted overwhelmingly to be part of Russia. No war fought, no protests prior or since, within the Crimea. Tibet is a very long and complicated history dating back 2000 years, and cannot be summarised in a few sentences. Suffice to say, China's claim to Tibet is rooted in that history. The recent history is born from the British occupation and attempted division of Tibet, and the attempted intervention by the CIA subsequently. China took military action to claim her sovereignty. Whatever one's personal view on Tibet, had Tibet not been occupied and stoked by colonial powers, I submit Tibet's course would be very different from what we have today. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

18 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Okay, I retract my original post as it has simply turned into a US bashing exercise with no real insight to be gained, much to my chagrin.

It is bullshit such as this that puts people off from posting a new thread about any issue whatsoever.

I'm not bashing the US.  What I am bashing is Trump.  Also, I hate discussions about "exploitation."  It's a word that loser nations pull out to explain why they suck (it's someone else's fault, blah blah blah).  I don't want to hear it from Chinese, I hate social justice warriors who use it, and I sure as hell don't want to hear it from American conservatives.  

China is outcompeting the US in many areas around the world.  So what are we going to do about it? The only edge the US has over China in many of these areas is moral authority, but after Trump what is left of that? 

Edited by Zhong Lu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

4 hours ago, DayTrader said:

Huh? Look through a bunch of threads. Tell me one post from a Brit that's anti USA.

Sorry, I should be more specific. Brits on the left seem to hate America at a rate that's proportional to how radicalized they are. In general I find Brits to be very polite and fun to talk to. 

Edited by KeyboardWarrior
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 minute ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

In general I find Brits to be very polite and fun to talk to. 

That's better :) 

Edited by DayTrader

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original question was: "how do readers perceive the BRI?".  My answer laid out 3 choices faced by those countries along the road. I gave factual examples of what the implications of each choice would and could mean. For this I am labelled a troll. Yet, a certain person in this thread has stated, emphatically in another thread, he desires the USA to bomb and invade Iran without delay. Such action is mass murder. So we have a person, maybe more. at this site advocating invasion and murder, yet not a peep from any one for such a vile and reprehensible position. Thus an advocate for mass murder is not a troll, but an advocate for facts is a troll. Such is the degraded state of humanity today. 

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Ok.  Let's stick to BRI.  

1.  It's a good idea.  Who else is developing these areas economically? If you don't like it, what's the alternative? 

2.  I like trade.  I like infrastructure building to promote trade.  What's wrong with that?

3.  Yes of course there are catches involved. The areas BRI spreads into will be integrated into China's sphere of influence.  But so long as both sides benefit, why is this a bad thing? The US tries to spread its influence. If it spends money in a location, it expects something in return. Part of the geopolitical game.

4. China is an aggressor in SE Asia.  However, its relationships in Africa and Central Asia are either outside the scope of US power, or otherwise relatively benign (personally I think the Russians should be objecting more to China's BRI in Central Asia- the fact that they're not, or at least not that I know of- is a MAJOR Chinese diplomatic coup, and is of much greater historical importance then the current trade spat with the US).  In SE Asia, China needs to be confronted.  But in Africa China appears to be a force for good and is outcompeting  the US.  

Edited by Zhong Lu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

In summary, Chinese BRI is eating Russia's lunch in Central Asia- the educated people in Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan are all busy learning Chinese these days.   They're outcompeting the US in Africa, and they're being an outright aggressor in SE Asia.   That's what I think of it.  

When someone earlier asked: "is China a good friend" my answer is "it depends on who you ask."  Hopefully I have clarified this position.  

Edited by Zhong Lu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Zhong Lu said:

I'm not bashing the US.  What I am bashing is Trump.  Also, I hate discussions about "exploitation."  It's a word that loser nations pull out to explain why they suck (it's someone else's fault, blah blah blah).  I don't want to hear it from Chinese, I hate social justice warriors who use it, and I sure as hell don't want to hear it from American conservatives.  

China is outcompeting the US in many areas around the world.  So what are we going to do about it? The only edge the US has over China in many of these areas is moral authority, but after Trump what is left of that? 

"China is outcompeting the US in many areas around the world." So true. Not in areas only, but also in technology and manufacturing. The 'edge' is not a moral edge': I see no morality in the USA of today. The only edge is her military and, though blunted, it is the only tool remaining. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

No, the US still has a moral edge.  I would rather have the US control certain areas of the world then the natives living there.  However, this edge is thinning and Trump's behavior of  "America First" in combination with his moral and financial corruption isn't helping.  

Edited by Zhong Lu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

657106285_TrumpThereItIs.png.b9976756b35eb984a2fb731970403db4.png

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Fair enough.  Blame that on Trump. He is an attention hog, after all.  I'm just giving him the attention he deserves.

Also, you're not helping in keeping the discussion on track either.

Edited by Zhong Lu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL coz of 1 meme?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Back on track:

Discussions about exploitation piss me off.  The only people who complain about exploitation are the ones who are weak or who feel like their position is weakening.  Groups who complain about exploitation are prey.  It's a word that I really don't want to hear from anyone.  

Edited by Zhong Lu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Zhong Lu said:

I'm not bashing the US.  What I am bashing is Trump.  

Why do you feel the need to ‘bash’ anything or anyone not relevant to the topic or question? ‘Bashing’ is not constructive debate or discussion. 

This simply causes ANY serious discussion to go ‘off the rails’, on a tangent until the ‘discussion’ does not even relate to the original post.

If you would like to continue this ‘discussion’, have at it - I’m out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, cya.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Zhong Lu said:

No, the US still has a moral edge.  I would rather have the US control certain areas of the world then the natives living there. 

Agreed.

20 minutes ago, Zhong Lu said:

However, this edge is thinning and Trump's behavior of  "America First" in combination with his moral and financial corruption isn't helping.  

TDS.  < sigh >

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tom Kirkman said:

TDS.  < sigh >

I beat you to it this time

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Zhong Lu said:

No, the US still has a moral edge.  I would rather have the US control certain areas of the world then the natives living there.  However, this edge is thinning and Trump's behavior of  "America First" in combination with his moral and financial corruption isn't helping.  

Please elaborate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

One of the reasons I made money on FNMA was because some of the hedge funds who control the commons and the preferreds of FNMA bet on Trump during the election.   Mnunchin, meanwhile, over the past several years, has made a very favorable plan and outline for the shareholders of FNMA, or at least much more favorable then what came before.  Check out FNMA's share price over the past several years. So Trump's "corruption" is not an abstract thing for me.  It's a very real thing that I've bet and made money on.  I knew he was going to be corrupt when he entered office, and I have profited personally from it.  

That's why I don't mind having him continue on as president.  But that he is corrupt, is without doubt, as I have made money betting on this "wonderful" trait of his.  Corruption is predictable, and makes for good trading.  

EDIT: So if you want to call it TDS, go ahead.  But I have very good monetary reasons (at least for me) for believing that Trump is corrupt.  The long-suffering shareholders of FNMA might call it "justice" but if you want to succeed at trading you must never lie to yourself.  

Edited by Zhong Lu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2019 at 6:27 PM, Zhong Lu said:

If you're listening to Steve Bannon in a fancy hotel room in Japan, or if you're posting on this forum, you're an elite.  Poor people don't post on oilprice.  Nor do poor people have the money or the time to listen to Bannon.  

I'm a cattle rancher just out of high school looking to become a chemical engineer. Doesn't sound very elite to me.. hee hee 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.