Moody’s warned that Beijing would need to bail out local and regional governments and state-owned enterprises that were struggling with rising debts, hampering efforts to boost investment and growth.

The USA does this all the time and it’s considered great and wise domestic policy

After all the lies about Xinjiang, forgive me if this feels like so much crying wolf

Nov 19. Just says after Xi and Biden met for the first time in a long time. This is a message from the US.

Why are there 2 worldnews communities on Lemmy.ml?

You have literally spent every comment in this thread saying nothing and you accuse me of tedium? Protect that psyche.

Says the person who’s literal response was “wrong”. You’re fucking ridiculous.

You still haven’t responded to my comment except to say I’m a shill using scripted talking points. That is a personal attack, it is literally ad hominem - against the man.

I went to ad hominem? I presented a position that opposed the commenter and the commenter accused me of being a shill for China. That is the literal definition of ad hominem.

Your understanding of pretty much every single point you made is entirely ahistorical and inconsistent with actual records. However, it’s 100% consistent with Western liberal propaganda including schooling.

The Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement was made, according to historical record, to give the USSR a better chance at surviving the coming onslaught. There were no illusions on Stalin’s part that the war was coming for the USSR as Hitler literally announced his intentions in Mein Kampf.

The idea that the USSR invaded Poland is a Western narrative reframing of the conflict between the USSR and the Third Reich.

The idea that allied supply lines are equivalent to millions of Soviet deaths is divorced from reality.

The idea that Stalin engaged in a land grab is equally a Western narrative reframing the post-war reality. The USSR marched all the way to Berlin. Every country they marched through had been destroyed by the war. The options were to leave them for the anti-communist to come through and attempt to destroy the USSR or stay behind and build self-governing Soviet republics. Unlike the land grabs of Japan, Germany, England, France, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, and the USA, the USSR built democratic republics and gave them the right to secede from the union. The majority of people in the former republics have said, through polls, that dismantling the USSR did more harm to them than good.

In the years immediately following the war the USA built NATO, staffed it with Nazis, executed Operation Paperclip to distribute Nazis all over the Western hemisphere, and executed Operation Gladio to arm, train, fund, and organize fascist militias all over Europe so that if the USSR ever backed out of any place it would immediately be taken over by fascists. Then the USA went on a massive killing spree all over the world.

As for your incorrect understanding of the Japanese surrender, you need to actually read the historical record. The USA and Britain disagreed on the terms and the USA insisted in strongarming the negotiations. The Soviets were trying to negotiate with Japan, but the USA wanted the Soviets out of the Pacific. The Japanese were in active negotiations and after several back-and-forths the USA made the Potsdam Declaration. The Japanese, imagining they were negotiating with rational human beings, rejected the terms and asked for specific conditions about maintaining their social institutions around the monarchy. The USA nuked hundreds of thousands of civilians in response.

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that it saved lives. Your entire framing is that the USA was allowed to just decide to do whatever it wanted because it won, up to and including nukes on civilians. This position is psychopathic.

Governments were shit back then

Mother fucker it was only 80 years ago. Are you that fucking daft? The USA got WORSE in those 80 years, not better.

Comparing Wagner group to the Mujahideen is ridiculous. Just pure brain rot.

As for this ridiculous idea that governments are better now… Isn’t it curious that it happened after you were born? Almost like now that you’re here, things are better. Of course they’d have to be, otherwise you would be living in an evil empire. And you aren’t are you? That would be terrible.

The reality is that the CIA still operates black sites where they torture people, the supreme Court protects them, the Congress protects them, the executive branch protects them. The US has invaded more countries after WW2 than before. In Libya, the country with the highest standard of living in all of Africa, the US bombed it to oblivion. After the president was lynched in the streets, Hillary Clinton, paragon of governments not being shits anymore, said “We came. We saw. He died.”

The amount of violent oppression the USA has delivered around the world since the end of world war 2 is unfathomable. The School of the Americas, alone, is responsible for so much bloodletting, and that’s just a fucking school.

Your entire world view is a collection of false narratives created by North Atlantic propagandists based on cherry picked facts that give them the veneer of authenticity. The reality is that the USA is the inheritor and current head of the 6 century North Atlantic project of global domination and nothing is off the table for them: nuking civilians, genocide, species extinction, child trafficking, systematized torture, overt military occupation, assassination, coups of democratically elected governments, medical experiments, apartheid, ghettoization, mass incarceration, slave labor.

Just because you’re here now doesn’t mean that suddenly governments are more rational.

Sure, because shills for foreign governments get aggressive instead of being trained on how to convince people of their positions ? You’re delusional.

LOL. What it must be like for you to navigate the world. Scripted talking point my ass.

Anything? Like punishing soldiers who kill innocent civilians including children and journalists during times of relative “peace”? Because that would surely have gone a long way to reducing the deaths of your “comrades”. Instead we have an Israeli sniper kill journalists and then the government says “they were armed with a camera”.

No. They are not doing everything they can to protect their soldiers. They are not seeking peace. They are seeking silence and subjugation.

Complete displacement of a peoples is a genocide

So, in WW2, the vast vast vast majority of the fight against “evil” was done by the USSR, because the Third Reich had, as one of its pillars, the destruction of the workers’ movement and the enslavement of the Slavs. The USSR lost far more than any other party to the war because the Third Reich made the war of choice, dehumanized the Slavs, and engaged in genocidal mass murder as a choice. The USSR defeated 80% of the Third Reich’s forces.

On the flip side, the American and British government and business communities were pro-fascist. They funded the rise of the Third Reich, they funded domestic and international eugenics programs, they were deeply invested in apartheid states and women’s oppression. (By way of contrast, the Brits and Americans used women as prostitutes to support the war effort while the USSR had women all over their military as snipers, tank operators, pilots, machine gunners, etc.)

So given that context, let’s look at the end of the war and what happened after. At the end of the war, the US wanted to make sure that the USSR didn’t liberate the rest of Western Europe from the Third Reich because they were anti-communist. The USA led the Western allies to Germany to create a border with the USSR (also a member of the allies, remember). It was this insistence that divided Germany into East and West Germany. Berlin was in East Germany because the USSR was the predominant victor in the war.

But then what of Japan. Before the USA nuked Japan, the USA and Japan were negotiating terms of surrender. The USA had made a very strict and ultimately untenable set of terms. Japan replied that they needed some domestic face saving in order to prevent their country from descending into violent and bloody internal revolution immediately. The USA received that message, and then chose to nuke 2 civilian cities. There was no emergency. The US wasn’t fighting for survival. Everything had already been secured. The USA was in active negotiations and Japan was participating (albeit through third parties because of the political sensitivity). The USA made an active deliberate choice to nuke civilians unnecessarily.

Why? Because communism was their real enemy. It was the reason they got involved in the war, it was the driving force behind their strategic decisions. They got involved against communism, they went to Germany against communism, they partitioned Germany against communism. And they nuked Japan as a show of force, or to demonstrate how bat shit they were, to create conditions of fear and restraint.

But if that were true, then wouldn’t the USA have just launched a war against communism? They did. They launched wars of choice against Vietnam and Korea. They destroyed Cambodia. They bombed Laos. The most bombed countries in the world were bombed by the USA, with multiple countries having the USA drop more bombs on them than all bombs dropped by all parties in WW2 combined.

They continued their eugenics programs for 20 more years after WW2, they advanced their chemical weapons programs and deployed atrocity after atrocity in these wars of choice, mostly against civilians.

Are people in the USA used to wars of choice? Yes, because in essence all USA wars have been wars of choice, even before the USA existed. Was it a necessity to invade The Phillipines? How about Grenada? Overthrow the Iranian government? Afghanistan in the 80s? Was it an existential necessity to genocide the indigenous peoples of the Americas, poisoning their water, destroying their ecosystems, destroying their agriculture and their sources of food?

The entire Western European project, which became the North Atlantic project, is about wars of choice - brutal wars of choice of genocide through war, through rape, through collective punishment, through environmental devastation, through eugenics, through slavery, through death camps, through occupation and extraction. The number of necessary wars the USA has been in is so vanishingly small that the very few exceptions prove the rule.

Except in this case “poking you in the eye” is killing people, including old and young, journalists and doctors, poets and farmers, cutting off food, water, and electricity, displacing millions, invading homes, destroying farms and infrastructure, and restricting freedom of movement.

You have no idea what you’re talking about. Rice was the US Secretary of State. You think the only politicians are elected officials? She was an active member of the Republican party and she held political power through the executive branch of the US government. Just because the manner of filling the office of Secretary of State is appointment and not election doesn’t mean she’s not a politician.

And if you think I’m a shill for China, when I have never been there, don’t speak or read the language, and don’t work in politics, international relations, international business, or journalism, then maybe you’re a little too sensitive to anyone holding a position that opposes yours because your position is completely unexamined and is constructed entirely by Western propaganda.

China’s way of partnering is domination? Why are you projecting the European project onto your political enemies? Domination is how the North Atlantic has “partnered” with the rest of the world for the last 600 years. China is providing an alternative.

You think China doesn’t believe in international law when that’s essentially the only position it has been expressing and espousing for decades? Again, you’re projecting. The USA has no interest in all countries being equal under international law. The USA is the scariest and most dangerous for world stability in the long run. Of the most bombed countries in the world, the US bombed the top 4 and all of them around China (Korea, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam).

The USA has politicians like Condoleeza Rice saying that invading sovereign nations is a war crime when she was a major architect of the US invading Iraq. Many of the countries you’re talking about are literally British construction. You think The Phillipines is named after someone who lives in that region? You think the borders of African nations are naturally straight?

It’s fucking ridiculous how blind you are to the projection.

LOL

You think you can opine on the best course of action for China but don’t even know if they have business with the Island of Taiwan? Talk about arrogantly ignorant!

Read some history. No right to speak without investigation.

It will be interesting to see, going forward, if Huawei can improve on their technology and processes

Why is this even a question? China is leading the world in high tech research.

to challenge NVidia

This is where the question is, but if we examine it, why would it be a question of if instead of when? What magic does NVidia have that the largest population in the world with the fastest growing economy in the history of the world can’t compete with?

The beginning of the new wave of red scare witch hunts?