Not just their head of state, also his daughter, son-in-law, and grandchild. Also multiple leaders from one chain of command across 3 layers.
That would be like killing Trump, Ivanka, Jared, their child, AND Vance, Mike Johnson, and McConnel all in a single night.
They killed three generations of his bloodline. Him, his daughter, her husband, and their child.
Wait, what?! Source please?
Subscribing to the international law model is equivalent to inviting foreign capital into invest in China - it’s using the opponent’s energy against it.
One thing that has been true for a while now is that while the US claims to be all about international law, it violates it constantly. But the US continues to use it justify sanctions and violence and rally many countries to common cause.
If China also subscribes to International Law and behaves better than the US, why would it be any different than say Luxembourg or Zimbabwe doing the same? Because of economics. As China ascends to the dominant economic position in the globe, and as it becomes capable of protecting other nations, more and more countries will be able to use International Law against the US.
We’re hoping the US is actually a paper tiger. If the US defeats one of its strongest opponents, it’s a signal that the US is much much stronger than we believed, and that has massive consequences
Also currently active in Somalia, Ukraine, Lebanon (via proxy, but not only), Syria, Iran (covert) and also threatening Colombia, Canada, China, Russia.
And yet, very very different. Kruschev’s liberalization and detante with America was an attempt to join the imperialist club and carve up the world as an ally to the US and ultimately resulted in the absolutely horrible inequality that developed in the final decades of the USSR.
Deng’s liberalization and detante with America was an attempt to get the US to fund the development of Chinese productive forces. That worked. It was not an attempt to join the imperialism club, and in fact China became less chauvinistic under Deng than under Mao. That shows correctness. And the resulting economics show continuous improvement of living and working conditions for Chinese workers when, at the same age, the USSR had already started to economically collapse.
Also, the other comments claiming that the USSR might not have collapsed without the split forget that China had almost nothing to offer the USSR at the time of the split. They were not an effective producer of anything. They were deeply impoverished. They were militarily weak. The split hurt China more than it hurt the USSR because it cost China access to technology, energy, military collaboration, etc.
I think the USSR probably would have dragged China down with it as it collapsed under the programming of the counter-revolutionaries. It’s not like China didn’t try. They were debates and discourse to attempt to analyze and convince the Kruschevites of the incorrectness of the oath they were on. Not only was China right rhetorically, China was right materially, and history has proven this to us.
The kids are not alright
It’s honestly so infuriating
Your sense of the numbers are way off. $2Bn is a small price to pay for the largest known oil reserves in the world. Very very very small price compared to what the profits will be within a year. Venezuela in 2025 was already at a million barrels per day which is at least 2 billion USD in revenue monthly.
Hold on to your butss
Got it, so how many ukrainians should die in order to prevent a point of inflation?
Can to just consider what you said here?
It’s better that bullets, missiles, and drones kill people and destroy infrastructure than it is for Ukraine to devalue their currency.
Is that really the position you hold?
Money isn’t real. Sovereign governments can’t run out of it. Of course issuing more can cause inflation, but are you gonna tell me that inflation is worse than not having defenses?
I guess? If you’re selling literally weapons, body armor, and shielding from a fucking warzone to somewhere else, I would think corruption would simply not be a forceful enough word to describe that action
But why do they need money? They got their weapons for debt. They can just do a Keynes and employ their people to build what they need to build. Is it just that they weren’t importing protection materials like concrete and rebar and stuff?
Is there any truth to the claim that the Rafale that India deployed were an older version/generation than the current 4.5gen Rafale?
Ok, hold on. Let’s slow down and be more exacting here, so I can understand what you’re saying. I am sure many people like me are reading this and just overloaded with the deluge of statements you’re making here.
Tell me if the following is true and what you’re saying:
Chinese citizens have a high savings rate, and that means a lot of money sitting in banks not being productive.
This is problematic for indebted entities because they need to remain solvent but the billions in savings are not circulating.
Local governments in China are heavily indebted because they borrowed Chinese money from private Chinese financial institutions.
The way local governments remained solvent in the recent past was through revenues from exports to the whole world.
The USA’s tarrif regime not only impacts direct China-to-USA exports but, through China’s search for replacement revenue, increases the flow of Chinese goods to other nations.
This increased flow threatens to flood markets in every nation which will cause every nation’s industry to fail. In Europe, this threat requires Europe to tarrif China. In the Global South, this will cause a bunch of insolvency that will give the IMF casus belli to expand globally.
When the USA raises interest rates, it harms local governments in China.
Let me stop there.
Are all 7 of these points things that you are claiming and are they accurate representations of a subset of your claims? If not, could you help me understand?
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ATA-2026-Unclassified-Report.pdf
Here’s the 2026 Threat Assessment that the video refers to