greggerypeccary wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2025 at 1:46pm:



That is your usual malicious and disgusting formulation, despicable lying creep.

Trump is prez.
Rubio is the Secretary of State.
Trump is carrying out the policy he campaigned on and was elected on.
His Secretary of State works on implementing and explaining the implementation of the promised policy. So he was interviewed by CNN and he explained what the Trump administration is doing.

You, being a congenitally despicable liar, would expect him to act like you would: to backstab and betray, to lie and maliciously undermine.

aquascoot wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2025 at 8:45am:


Did it? I think you are misreading the stats:

(wiki)

The total amount of U.S. Treasury securities held by foreign entities in December 2021 was $7.7 trillion, up from $7.1 trillion in December 2020.Total US federal government debt breached the $30 trillion mark for the first time in history in February 2022

Not exactly the comparison I want, but you can see US foreign debt is only around a quarter of total US debt.

and google

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that interest payments (on US debt) will total $952 billion in fiscal year 2025 and rise rapidly throughout the next decade"

ie interest on total US debt - not US debt held by foreigners (which is about a quarter of total US debt) -  will match the Pentagon's budget in 2025.   

Quote:


Well, he's on the right track, by pulling out all stops to attract manufacturing away from China back to the US. 

In war, the ability to produce stuff is king; China is currently streets ahead.

Quote:


Trump has certainly slowed China's  rise with his trade wars - before the pandeminc,  China was expected to surpass the US economy by the end of the decade, but no-one expects that now, because China can't easily find alternative markets to replace the massive consumption capacity of the US economy.

But the US pivot away from the ME and Europe (and Russia which is a minnow in terms of consumption, and only has its nuclear-arsenal card left) is certainly a good move (from the US perspective): China is the real competitor which might soon rival US military power, owing to China's prowess in new tech as well as its massive productive capacity.

Quote:


Yes, because he's a strong man backed by the Pentagon, speaks to Xi,  and is prepared to negotiate to avoid war - and isn't likely to cross China's redlines to  "defend" Taiwan which isn't even an independent nation (and never has been). 

Quote:


An effective international rules-based system, still some time away.....

[Maybe when/if the PLA can demonstrably bring more force to the table than the Pentagon, this will be the time men decide the arms race is bs, and disputes can be settled without resort to war. I expect China, at that time,  won't be interested in being a new global empire, rather playing a role in establishing a new universal prosperity, under the auspices of an effective UN international rules based system].

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2025 at 5:37pm:

Marla lives on cannabis. You too?

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2025 at 6:06pm:


So what's with the massive military build-up by Chi- na.

aquascoot wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2025 at 8:45am:


Hi there, Aquascoot. You neglected to include Russia in your assessment.

Interest rate 21%. Inflation 10%. Foreign assets frozen. $300 bil in foreign debt. 800,000 men dead.

Russia is currently losing this one. Their invasion has reached an effective stalemate. The war is draining all available funds, with no gains.

All Vlad needs is a nuclear power to tap him on the back and say, it's time.

The alternative is what, exactly?

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2025 at 6:06pm:

The US long-nose navy is the hated global hegemony. China is buying Africa, South America and the port of Darwin.

Frank wrote on Mar 2^nd, 2025 at 6:14pm:


To convince the US that Taiwan is not worth "defending" (since Taiwan has never been an independent state, (unlike Ukraine, whose independence, ironically,  Krushev  granted to Ukraine when the Warsaw Pact was a balancing force vis a vis NATO).....


But my point was (which you ignored): if/when China surpasses the US economy eg, if a consensus one-party state proves to be  more efficient for maximising economic growth than an adversarial  multi-party democracy***, then China - as suggested by aquascoot - being 'inward looking, might prefer to hand the responsibilities of being  'the world's policeman' to the UN  (via an UNSC minus its crippling veto power).

[**China is soon engaging in its annual 'two sessions' annual gathering of top policy makers, in which delegates hammer out policies for maximising economic growth consistent with the nation's five year plans; quite a different system to one in which eg Trump's policies are likely to be overturned in the US midterm elections as he alienates the workers who elected him...] 

 

Karnal wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2025 at 5:36am:


The strange - and sad thing - is your inability to analyze
"national self-interest", and then resort to the insanity of war to settle disputes arising from that self-interest.

[Interestingly, the anti-nuclear-weapons people are out in force in NY for  their week-long events calling for global nuclear disarmanent,  while Trump himself has said there are "too many nukes in the world", forcing the US to stay ahead in the nuclear arm race, thereby directing resources away from social welfare in the US: the US spends only 20% of GDP on social programs, cf, Europe's similar size economy which spends 25% of GDP on social welfare.  Cf, military spending: US - 3.5% of GDP,  Europe - 2%.]

Quote:


To dissuade you from "defending" Taiwan which is inhabited by Chinese people, and has never been an independent nation.

While  the Oz military are supposedly maintaining "freedom of passage" in the SCS including transits of the Taiwan Straits, when China -  the world' greatest trading nation -  itself needs that "freedom of passage"  to remain open.   

Quote:


No. Trump knows  a war with a nuclear power to "defend"  Tawain is insane. You want to risk WW3?

Quote:


No.  War is obsolete in the age of MAD, which was Trump's point to Zelensky.