Ironic that now we're crying about China's shift to hard power. Part of the reason they've been eating our lunch in emerging markets is that their business interests don't come with a side order of coup plotting by evangelical mercenaries. Or what have you.

Countries will side with countries who bring investment and jobs to them instead of bombs and death. Who knew

The Chinese have known all along it would come to this.
They are well prepared for any type of aggressive action taken by the US.
I can only imagine they must wonder what took so long.
China is now far too powerful economically and the US far too weak militarily to cause any serious concern.
China can call up and properly equip 100 million men to defend the borders.
Even if the US pulled all its military from all over the world and attacked China, it would not be nearly enough.

They are well prepared for any type of aggressive action taken by the US.

That's the part which continues to amaze me - that they anticipated Imperial America coming for them. Possibly this is because they've seen a succession of Pompous Arseho*le Presidents starting with Clinton. One wonders if Clinton's attack on their embassy in Yugoslavia didn't start opening their eyes. From that point they would have watched events in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and the attempts to suffocate Iran.
Trump was an horrible, awful, and monstrous President in every way. Biden is showing many signs of being even worse in Foreign Affairs.

That's saying something!

I'm still wondering why Clinton bombed the China embassy in Belgrade. No doubt you're right, but by what logic was this considered tactically or strategically valid?

Was there a Bimbo Eruption going on? That would have been a tactical reason for the dual Clinton Presidency (that's what she said).

Robert, it was an error made by our blessed military.

That was the lie at the time. The proof of which is that it was pronounced as the official truth.

I remember reading some obscure transcripts by Mao Tse-tung years ago.
He warned the future generations of Chinese leaders that one day the US would seriously attack China whenever it became a legitimate threat. Perhaps even with nuclear weapons.
He had no illusions, even back then, regarding a benevolent US hegemony.
So, he advised future leaders to always appear weak and subservient to US interests until the very last minute when China's true power could no longer be hidden.
He advised the future CCP leaders to be ready for that day because it would almost certainly be all-out war if they were not very careful.
Mao was extremely well educated and was well aware of the famous "Thucydides' Trap".

Mar, maybe the Nimitz, "Tic Tacs" are indeed China's???? If so USA finished.

Smith, Trump was an AZZhole often but not nearly as bad as your rant screams out. Trump was under attack by every MOFU DC Ghoul and news media before he even took office, open your eyes and realize just what went down.

Trump thrived on those attacks. His twitter account and his rallies proved that. And now he sits like an exiled King while his subjects flock to him and kiss his ass so he's still thriving on those attacks. He wasn't only a lousy president, like his predecessors and successor, he is absolutely the worst ex-president that ever existed. Open YOUR eyes.

The War Party considers troop numbers obsolete. And even if it's a wash in terms of missile tech and guidance, the US has greater durance.

It's clear to the planners, there's no solution to the climate crisis, everything essential, from water and oil to lithium and cobalt, etc., is going to be in ever shorter supply, and that whoever wins the resource wars is going to be the only one able to live in a fashion to make life worth it. So their calculus tells them the sooner the better and at whatever the cost (in human life), losing will be even worse. The law of nature, the food chain, the strong eat the weak, is the constant.

Robert, I am with you on antiwar. I would like to add that the propaganda that "war is a good evil to control human overpopulation" has been used to aid pro-war governments. See: https://confluence.gallatin...
Regarding the "Climate Crisis," the first step was to establish a threat from "human driven global warming," but carbon dioxide did not cause catastrophic global warming as alleged. It actually managed to green the planet, making the planet more fertile and effective in feeding people. The term was changed to "Climate Change" to adjust for the lack of significant global warming trend. Other than control/tax, the "Climate Crisis" is also used as a deadly distraction from the actual warmongering by the west. See Wikileaks documents: https://wikileaks.org/gifil...

The label change "global warming" to "climate change" was by way of accommodating the demotic. Though both are obviously consistent, the former has greater scientific precision. But since the popular mind is extremely limited --doesn't keep a running measure of permafrost or sea level, etc., ....

The author of the Stratfor memo doesn't present a single scientifically substantive argument. His entire schtick is ad hominem, accusing the science community of group-think and intellectual cowardice.
It's the small change of oil-patch propaganda.

I have to respectfully disagree. Just to be clear, you are not accusing me and WikiLeaks (see the linked documents) of promoting oil patch propaganda, correct?

No, the Stratfor author; but am surprised you would extend credence to their offerings, any more than you do to the think-tankers who are advising the elite on global hegemony.

You are making my point. I love people and don't want them to die from wars or pollution. That article connects the dots on how elites develop propaganda to make something "a necessary war," even when it involves killing innocent people and death of our own children. My point is, antiwar should be front and center. Elites seeking global hegemony use the same methodology whether it's war on terror, war on climate, war on drugs, etc.

NA, no matter how you look at it, unless there is major technology advances in energy, etc., and a move to control population via. birth not war, humans and Earth are on an express elevator to hell and the evil one awaits with a big smile. :(

Robert, so true, the only solution is vast population control to cut the use of those resources to those that are only parasites, takers and not producers. I am however sure the answer to many of those issues is already flying around our skies, the UAP's,,, technology is the answer. I am basing that statement on facts, not assumptions.

Yes, that, eliminating the financial sector, is the sine qua non. But also the war industry, the pop cult, including propaganda (misnamed "news") industry, ...along with all their lawyers, accountants, etc., ....

Do the american people get a say?

No

deg, not in a long time have they had any say! DC Ghouls rule.

China is the Peer Competitor that the US Defense Dept needed to justify is bloated budgets and huge forces (by world standards).

All this does is crow that now they've got what they'd wanted and needed since the collapse of the Soviet Union almost caused peace to break out, almost led to a peace dividend at the expense of DoD like it did everywhere else.

And so the competition, of course, is military might to win the 21st century. Who could have guessed.

Under the right circumstances we can all win,,but humans will most likely succumb to their worst desires.

I remember the tales told to us by an older guy in our neighborhood who had been drafted into the Korean War. He told of how fanatical Chinese peasants - some not even armed- charged into dug-in American machine gun positions until the Americans would run out of ammunition. You can bet that the present-day, Chinese forces will be better armed this go around.

"To compete with China, Biden said he told President Xi that the US will militarize the Indo-Pacific “just as we do with NATO in Europe.”

"Biden said" ... ?

No, Biden didn't say. Neocons say. The Neocon puppet, Incredible Husk President, neither says, nor thinks, nor decides anything. He reads off the teleprompter, and signs where he is told to sign.

Sounds like something he would say.

That is so true of JoBye.

Awwwwww, you mean China isn't content being second place forever? Gosh, who would've thought it?

Except for relatively brief periods, China has generally been the biggest and strongest country in the world. Attempting to stop this is an exercise in futility and will only accelerate our own imperial decline. Let's instead look at this as an opportunity o restore the old republic, if we still can?

China knows America is a country occupied and colonized by Pentagonian austeritizers who cannot rely on anyone anywhere.

A $6 trillion upcoming budget is hardly "austerity."

I suspect he meant austerity for the dirt people.

By "dirt people" do you mean the insanely subsidized American lower and middle classes, or foreigners who get bombed and starved?

This conversation reminds me of Reagan's welfare moms driving cadillac convertibles.

And the song,"Ten kids in a cadillac, stand in line for welfare check... We all get by, the best that we can... And we all gotta duck, when the shit hits the fan."

Austerity is what wealthy people do to poor people to make them pay the rich people to make more jobs.

"Austerity is what wealthy people do to poor people to make them pay the rich people to make more jobs."

Exactly.

Which is not what's happening in the US.

That's not to say what's happening in the US is good, just that it's the opposite of "austerity" for the economic bottom 50-75% of the populace.

Maybe a good start is for guys to keep their di#ks in their pants and women keep their legs crossed unless they want to work and support the babies they produce??

Speaking from the middle class, I haven't noticed any insane subsidies, and $2 trillion deficits as far as the eye can see look like a highly regressive inflation tax to me. My "stimulus" check definitely doesn't make up for a 4% cost of living increase, much less the far greater price increases I'm actually seeing.

Inflation as a tax is certainly regressive. But in the main, the top 20% of earners in the US pay 80% of the taxes, and the bottom 40% pay less in taxes than they receive in transfer payments of various kinds.

When the fake American "left" whines about "austerity," it's not the American people they're saying are being kept too poor -- it's the poor, tiny, starving, pathetic US government, which across all levels "only" steals 40% of every dollar's worth of wealth created.

This "top 20% pay 80% of taxes" narrative only counts the income tax as "taxes". Payroll taxes, sales taxes, inflation taxes and other taxes are actually regressive.

I'm in the top 20% of earners, but I don't see any paucity of state benefits for the top 20% (and top 10% and top 1%) of earners. I doubt that I'd have my income at all without a bloated corporative state sector.

Talk of "austerity" may only whine for more state spending, but reducing it all to "transfer payments" for the bottom 40% is stacking the rhetorical deck.

That's a fair critique.

The function of the state is, generally speaking, to siphon wealth from the pockets of the productive class into the bank accounts of the political class. But in the case of the US, that generally is less a cash and carry proposition at the moment. In the cash sense, we don't have the same "austerity" as governments that have to balance their budgets.

On the other hand, we also don't have the same welfare state benefits seen in some of the European social democracies. To have that, we'd have to see the "middle class" taxed on income at 50-65%, which would never fly politically. Americans want the bennies, they just don't want to pay the bill.

Thomas, cut all foreign aid and reign in military spending and wars, big time, and then make other needed changes, and we can do just fine. But that ain't gonna happen.................

Much as it's always fun to criticize the low hanging fruit of "government spending"...it is also pretty easy to furnish a list of "productive" government services. Consider tho, in terms of spending, interest payments per citizen is nearly triple government spending (which of course, pays it's own interest). What interest payments buy...is permission.

"it is also pretty easy to furnish a list of 'productive' government services"

If it's pretty easy to furnish, feel free to furnish it.

Well, you got a safe and emission standardized car. Licensed for various reasons.
Standardized roads, fuel, traffic signage and policing
Regulated insurance.
License procedures for drivers.
Laws and more laws for driving behavior.
Traffic engineers and planning.
A weather service for driving conditions.
Subsidized buses, trains and planes.
Subsidized parking.
Systems to remove junk cars.
GPS to figure out how to get there.
Legal systems for problems.
Jails for horrid and drunk drivers.
Not even close to perfect, but, if you drove somewhere today, and got home, I'd say it is productive.

X = bad, P = private sector would likely have produced better

X Standardized roads, fuel, traffic signage and policing
P Regulated insurance.
X License procedures for drivers.
P Laws and more laws for driving behavior.
P Traffic engineers and planning.
P A weather service for driving conditions.
X Subsidized buses, trains and planes.
X Subsidized parking.
P Systems to remove junk cars.
P GPS to figure out how to get there.
P Legal systems for problems.
X Jails for horrid and drunk drivers.

Half of those are bad things, and the other half are things that the private sector would likely have produced earlier, better, and less expensively if government had allowed it to.

Feel free to mark which things on the list are bad, and which ones the glorious and oppressed private sector would have produced.