I slightly disagree. I truly believe it will come to wmd usage. Maybe not anytime soon. Maybe not in my lifetime but one day the US will do what they tend to do when conventional warfare doesn’t work and that is drop bombs. End of the world stuff.

People rag on the US for being “unable to fight a war” but the casualty rates are almost ALWAYS higher on the other side whether the goal the government “claims” was met or not. Any intelligent person knows the US doesn’t tell the truth to its citizens about the real intentions of going to places to fight. They use conflict as a political, economical and social distraction. If you think the US politicians and generals TRULY believe they can end a holy war, an entire religion, starvation, economic expansion and tyranny you honestly should be in a padded cell.(not YOU who I quoted just whoever in general to clarify.)




EDIT:
To the guy that says Mexico owns New Mexico and Texas… I got many words but since you mentioned Palestine….Mexico is just as bad… just because a lot of them are part native nowadays doesn’t mean half of their lineage didn’t nearly annihilate and do unspeakable things to the other half. Most of us that claim our heritage dislike Mexico/Spain just as much as the US often.

This post was edited by MadMan87 on Dec 15 2021 11:50am

The majority of the ruling party’s candidates lean towards center right and no significant leftist legislation has passed in many years.

Neocons have been firmly in power since Reagan and every democratic presidency since then has pushed the democrats farther right.

Joe Biden’s political career started as a self-proclaimed conservative and hasn’t moved at all since. The party moved right to meet him and now high school dropouts and pundits call him a leftist despite him having never openly supported any actual leftist groups or policies.

This post was edited by Doggyfood on Dec 15 2021 12:46pm

I tried to write a thesis for my LLM paper on South China Sea conflict back in 2018 but quickly realised it was too complicated so I gave up. But I did spend a bit time research on the topic so I will do a quick pin point summary of my thoughts:

1. China claimed the majority of South China Sea if not all based on customary law and non-interruptive use since song and ming dynasty. (Some of the evidence included the maps they recovered from historical tombs and books wrote by historians in ancient china.) The modern claim is categorised as "9 dash line", google it so I won't have to explain here. The argument had some forces because if you believe China is an unified country over the last 3000 to 5000 years (some western scholars argued 3000 years in contrary to 5000 years claimed by Chinese historians) then back thousands of years ago there was no Philippine, Vietnam or most of south east Asia countries let alone fishing customs. Customary law has more or less been recognized in the international courts and/or in arbitration. An example being the New Zealand indigenous people (the Maoris") had their customary fishing rights and rights to land recognised in the Supreme Court despite at the time the Maoris had no Torrens system of any form of recognition equivalent to the modern day of "title" system.

2. The USA does not agree with the argument above. Its counter argument is on the basis of "freedom of voyage". They argued that China is a treaty member to United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which means "Out to 12 nautical miles (22 kilometres; 14 miles) from the baseline, the coastal state is free to set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Vessels were given the right of innocent passage through any territorial waters, with strategic straits allowing the passage of military craft as transit passage, in that naval vessels are allowed to maintain postures that would be illegal in territorial waters." However, quite ironically the USA is not a treaty member because it has not signed it. The reason is quite obvious due to its heavy navy force and global strategy of many naval bases all over the world as the USA is often being referred as the "world police". This complicated the southern China Sea conflict as back in 2016 Philippines took China to the Hague international court of arbitration over breaches of its exclusive economic zone but China refused to participate. Philippine won by default judgement however the judgement could not be enforced so more or less resulted a morale victory. On the other hand, the Philippines seemed not that keen to upheld its own victory because it had so many ties with China on economic correlations even though the USA supported Philippine but due to it did not not ratify the treaty its support and/or stance seemed quite weak on its own. Anyway, the southern China sea conflict remained unresolved. Although Vietnam and a few other south east Asian countries had raised various disputes but due to their economic ties with China they seemed reluctant to formally raised these complaints in any international jurisdiction. China always favoured bilateral negotiation between disputed countries than having to involve international community, especially the USA as part of the non-involving party.

3. Having mentioned point 1 and point 2 I quickly realised South China Sea conflict cannot be resolved by legal analysis. At end of the day, this is more or less political interests based issue. The bottom line is, the USA intends to remain the "world dominator" yet China strives for territorial dominance, i.e. in the East Asia. Would there be war between China and USA in the near future? I doubt it as war is disastrous to both countries yet as China catches up from economical and military development and the USA weakens as time elapse there may be confrontations through test fire which may or may not result full scaled war. An example would be Taiwan if it seeks independence then China would have no choice but to resort to military force and the USA needs to respond either by military interference or possible economic sanctions? There are so many things we don't know. The Chinese are overly optimistic thinking that the USA would not risk their solders' life to protect Taiwan which is not USA's core interest, this may be true yet if the timing is not right, the USA could wage a war in order to shift its own internal conflict and use China as scapegoat. On the other hand, Americans could also be over confident thinking that their military will destroy everything yet end up in a situation like the Koreans war which they never anticipated that China would march towards Korea when their military force was far inferior at that time. I believe the USA's overall defense force is stronger however we are talking about a territorial war here the USA airplane carriers would not be so useful when targeted by the inland missiles from mainland China and the military gap between the two countries are much smaller in comparison to the Korean war. Nuclear war? Never otherwise we are looking at WWIII and total annihilations for earth lol.

This post was edited by zhaorich on Dec 17 2021 11:51pm

tyvm for all replies.

don't want thread to expire.

Always curious if new things are going on.

I've never heard of this source.


How credible are they?

After 2020 when i read about China i always think of Covid
Don't know why though

Strange, id think a clone like you would think it came out of a lab or some other circle jerk nonsense.