正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

The real problem for U.S. chip bans is not that China keeps “catching up.” It is that China is starting to bypass the logic of the blockade itself. A 10,000-beam laser direct-write lithography system, 95% light uniformity, around 50nm precision, with AI deep learning improving control and efficiency. It... show more

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

55,720 subscribers

40,519 次观看 • 5 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

新闻政治科学技术

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

ART IS ART Art does not ask what tool you used. It asks if you made something worth looking at. That is the whole argument. The rest is noise. AI artists are not a glitch in the timeline. They are here. They ship. They stay up late. They build worlds, characters, mornings, and tiny impossible things that did not exist yesterday. Some people will keep calling it theft. Some will keep calling it slop. Fine. Let them talk. We will keep posting. If a piece moves you, that is art. If a community shows up under it and makes more, that is a scene. If someone found a way to tell their story after years of being locked out of the old gate, that is not a crime. That is the point. Support the work. Quote the piece you love. Leave the artist a real comment, not a lecture. The future is not waiting for permission. It is already on the timeline. We grow it together.

ART IS ART Art does not ask what tool you used. It asks if you made something worth looking at. That is the whole argument. The rest is noise. AI artists are not a glitch in the timeline. They are here. They ship. They stay up late. They build worlds, characters, mornings, and tiny impossible things that did not exist yesterday. Some people will keep calling it theft. Some will keep calling it slop. Fine. Let them talk. We will keep posting. If a piece moves you, that is art. If a community shows up under it and makes more, that is a scene. If someone found a way to tell their story after years of being locked out of the old gate, that is not a crime. That is the point. Support the work. Quote the piece you love. Leave the artist a real comment, not a lecture. The future is not waiting for permission. It is already on the timeline. We grow it together.

Toshi

17,825 次观看 • 18 天前

$🇺🇸🇨🇳 The next world order may not begin with a war. It may begin with China vetoing Washington at the UN while the U.S. discovers it no longer has the leverage to force the outcome it wants. Lt. Col. Anthony Aguilar argues the U.S. is entering a multipolar era overstretched, politically fractured, and weaker than it admits, while Beijing quietly positions itself to shape the rules of what comes next. “Anyone that thinks that the U.S. military is strong and ready for anything is simply not informed.” @AnthonyAgu88102$

🇺🇸🇨🇳 The next world order may not begin with a war. It may begin with China vetoing Washington at the UN while the U.S. discovers it no longer has the leverage to force the outcome it wants. Lt. Col. Anthony Aguilar argues the U.S. is entering a multipolar era overstretched, politically fractured, and weaker than it admits, while Beijing quietly positions itself to shape the rules of what comes next. “Anyone that thinks that the U.S. military is strong and ready for anything is simply not informed.” @AnthonyAgu88102

Mario Nawfal

90,892 次观看 • 4 个月前

🚨 CHINA BUILDS WHILE AMERICA BURNS BILLIONS 🚨 Marco Rubio says America does not want to contain China, but China should not rise at America’s expense. However, who is actually draining America? While China builds infrastructure, expands manufacturing, and signs business deals across the world, Washington is spending $1 billion a day on war in Iran and maintaining hundreds of military bases across the globe. That money is not being spent for the American people. It is being burned in West Asia to weaken Iran, control the Strait of Hormuz, and secure Israel’s dream of becoming the dominant empire of the region. American taxpayers are being sucked dry while China invests in its future. So maybe the problem is not that China is rising. Maybe the problem is that the United States chose empire over its own people.

🚨 CHINA BUILDS WHILE AMERICA BURNS BILLIONS 🚨 Marco Rubio says America does not want to contain China, but China should not rise at America’s expense. However, who is actually draining America? While China builds infrastructure, expands manufacturing, and signs business deals across the world, Washington is spending $1 billion a day on war in Iran and maintaining hundreds of military bases across the globe. That money is not being spent for the American people. It is being burned in West Asia to weaken Iran, control the Strait of Hormuz, and secure Israel’s dream of becoming the dominant empire of the region. American taxpayers are being sucked dry while China invests in its future. So maybe the problem is not that China is rising. Maybe the problem is that the United States chose empire over its own people.

Kevork Almassian

30,931 次观看 • 4 个月前

The Economist asks why China and America see AI so differently. The answer is bigger than technology. It is psychology. In China, optimism about AI runs from government policy to companies to ordinary workers. People know disruption is coming. They know jobs will change. They know some industries will disappear. But the instinct is still: build first, adapt fast, solve the problems as they appear. In America, the instinct increasingly runs the other way: fear the disruption, litigate it, regulate it, politicize it, build barriers around it, and then call the barriers “responsible innovation.” The difference is deeper than AI. China still has a strong social belief that technology can make life better and that society can absorb change. America increasingly treats every technological shift as another mechanism through which ordinary people may be abandoned by the system. That is why one society sees robots and asks: “How do we use them?” while the other asks: “Who is going to lose their job?” One is operating from confidence. The other from accumulated distrust. And that matters far more than any benchmark. You cannot lead a technological revolution if your society has already decided that every new technology is another threat waiting to happen. China is not fearless because disruption does not hurt. China is less afraid because it still believes disruption can be survived. America’s real problem is not that it fears AI. It is that too many Americans no longer trust their own system to protect them from the future. The real AI gap may not be compute. It may be confidence in the future.

The Economist asks why China and America see AI so differently. The answer is bigger than technology. It is psychology. In China, optimism about AI runs from government policy to companies to ordinary workers. People know disruption is coming. They know jobs will change. They know some industries will disappear. But the instinct is still: build first, adapt fast, solve the problems as they appear. In America, the instinct increasingly runs the other way: fear the disruption, litigate it, regulate it, politicize it, build barriers around it, and then call the barriers “responsible innovation.” The difference is deeper than AI. China still has a strong social belief that technology can make life better and that society can absorb change. America increasingly treats every technological shift as another mechanism through which ordinary people may be abandoned by the system. That is why one society sees robots and asks: “How do we use them?” while the other asks: “Who is going to lose their job?” One is operating from confidence. The other from accumulated distrust. And that matters far more than any benchmark. You cannot lead a technological revolution if your society has already decided that every new technology is another threat waiting to happen. China is not fearless because disruption does not hurt. China is less afraid because it still believes disruption can be survived. America’s real problem is not that it fears AI. It is that too many Americans no longer trust their own system to protect them from the future. The real AI gap may not be compute. It may be confidence in the future.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

61,872 次观看 • 1 个月前

The real answer is China is NOT, nor has ever been, communist. Communism is a moneyless, classless, and stateless society. The only reason China, and the Soviet Union for that matter, called itself communist was because it was a future ideal, not an established system. The cold war has literally stupefied people to the point they don't understand history or even definitions of words.🧐

The real answer is China is NOT, nor has ever been, communist. Communism is a moneyless, classless, and stateless society. The only reason China, and the Soviet Union for that matter, called itself communist was because it was a future ideal, not an established system. The cold war has literally stupefied people to the point they don't understand history or even definitions of words.🧐

ShanghaiPanda （ Account deactivation）

77,181 次观看 • 1 年前

SpaceX was supposed to be America’s sacred crown jewel. The symbol of American innovation. The proof that only the U.S. could define the future of reusable rockets. The technological altar where Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and Washington all worshipped together. And now China has successfully completed its first controlled recovery of an orbital-class rocket booster with the Long March 10B. Not by copying the American landing-pad model. Not by repeating SpaceX’s path. China used a sea-based net-capture system — a different technical route, a Chinese solution, built for its own launch architecture. That is why this matters. China is not just entering reusable rocketry. China is entering it with its own method. For years, the West comforted itself with one myth: China can manufacture, but America still owns the frontier. EVs broke that myth. Solar broke that myth. Shipbuilding broke that myth. AI began breaking that myth. Now reusable rockets are breaking it too. SpaceX may still ahead. But the crown is no longer untouchable. China did not need permission to reach orbit. China did not need applause to recover the booster. It just built, tested, failed, learned, and came back. Again.

SpaceX was supposed to be America’s sacred crown jewel. The symbol of American innovation. The proof that only the U.S. could define the future of reusable rockets. The technological altar where Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and Washington all worshipped together. And now China has successfully completed its first controlled recovery of an orbital-class rocket booster with the Long March 10B. Not by copying the American landing-pad model. Not by repeating SpaceX’s path. China used a sea-based net-capture system — a different technical route, a Chinese solution, built for its own launch architecture. That is why this matters. China is not just entering reusable rocketry. China is entering it with its own method. For years, the West comforted itself with one myth: China can manufacture, but America still owns the frontier. EVs broke that myth. Solar broke that myth. Shipbuilding broke that myth. AI began breaking that myth. Now reusable rockets are breaking it too. SpaceX may still ahead. But the crown is no longer untouchable. China did not need permission to reach orbit. China did not need applause to recover the booster. It just built, tested, failed, learned, and came back. Again.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

60,837 次观看 • 2 个月前

The greatest risk we face today is not market volatility. It is not even war in the traditional sense. It is that democracies fail to reimagine sovereignty and prosperity in the age of AI. This is not a theoretical threat. It is a practical one. Because power is shifting, rapidly, from the old levers of influence to the new architecture of intelligence. Nations that cannot adapt will not only fall behind. They will lose control of their economic future, their digital infrastructure, and ultimately their political agency.

The greatest risk we face today is not market volatility. It is not even war in the traditional sense. It is that democracies fail to reimagine sovereignty and prosperity in the age of AI. This is not a theoretical threat. It is a practical one. Because power is shifting, rapidly, from the old levers of influence to the new architecture of intelligence. Nations that cannot adapt will not only fall behind. They will lose control of their economic future, their digital infrastructure, and ultimately their political agency.

Nina Schick

33,207 次观看 • 11 个月前

Beijing’s answer is basically: Ask it ten thousand times. The answer will still be the same. China is a Pacific country. China is not bound by a notification regime it never joined. When China gives advance notice, that is responsible conduct. It is not an admission that South Pacific island nations have jurisdiction over the Pacific. And before demanding a 24-hour rule from China, perhaps Washington and its Pacific partners should first explain whether they have applied the same standard to themselves. Courtesy is not sovereignty. Notification is not permission. The Pacific is not an American-controlled firing range with a Chinese entry permit. You do not get to normalize hundreds of American missile tests, then suddenly discover “regional trauma” when China conducts one. China is not asking Washington’s South Pacific vassal states for permission to exist in the Pacific.

Beijing’s answer is basically: Ask it ten thousand times. The answer will still be the same. China is a Pacific country. China is not bound by a notification regime it never joined. When China gives advance notice, that is responsible conduct. It is not an admission that South Pacific island nations have jurisdiction over the Pacific. And before demanding a 24-hour rule from China, perhaps Washington and its Pacific partners should first explain whether they have applied the same standard to themselves. Courtesy is not sovereignty. Notification is not permission. The Pacific is not an American-controlled firing range with a Chinese entry permit. You do not get to normalize hundreds of American missile tests, then suddenly discover “regional trauma” when China conducts one. China is not asking Washington’s South Pacific vassal states for permission to exist in the Pacific.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

41,067 次观看 • 20 天前

The real story of China’s “artificial sun” is not sci-fi aesthetics. It is industrial depth. Many countries can talk about fusion. China is building the supply-chain ecosystem that makes fusion engineering real. That is the difference between future rhetoric and future capacity.

The real story of China’s “artificial sun” is not sci-fi aesthetics. It is industrial depth. Many countries can talk about fusion. China is building the supply-chain ecosystem that makes fusion engineering real. That is the difference between future rhetoric and future capacity.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

16,603 次观看 • 6 个月前

Jensen Huang says it has “largely conceded” China’s AI chip market to Huawei Nvidia was not rejected because China “hates” Nvidia. It was pushed out because Washington turned chips into a leash. China learned the lesson very clearly: You cannot build AI sovereignty on hardware that your geopolitical rival can revoke with one export-control memo. Jensen Huang can be friendly. Nvidia can be excellent. Chinese demand can be huge. None of that changes the strategic reality. If the neck of China’s AI industry depends on an American-controlled chip supply, then it is not an industry. It is a hostage. So China did what any serious civilization-state would do: It built alternatives. It endured the pain. It let Huawei grow into the space Washington forced open. Now Nvidia says it has “largely conceded” China’s AI chip market to Huawei. That is not China closing a door. That is America sawing off the bridge, then acting surprised when China built its own road.

Jensen Huang says it has “largely conceded” China’s AI chip market to Huawei Nvidia was not rejected because China “hates” Nvidia. It was pushed out because Washington turned chips into a leash. China learned the lesson very clearly: You cannot build AI sovereignty on hardware that your geopolitical rival can revoke with one export-control memo. Jensen Huang can be friendly. Nvidia can be excellent. Chinese demand can be huge. None of that changes the strategic reality. If the neck of China’s AI industry depends on an American-controlled chip supply, then it is not an industry. It is a hostage. So China did what any serious civilization-state would do: It built alternatives. It endured the pain. It let Huawei grow into the space Washington forced open. Now Nvidia says it has “largely conceded” China’s AI chip market to Huawei. That is not China closing a door. That is America sawing off the bridge, then acting surprised when China built its own road.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

236,227 次观看 • 4 个月前

Sacks: China’s Biggest AI Advantage Over America Is Optimism @jason on China's Robot Olympics: “This is pretty crazy. The CCP is f**king brilliant at PR. Look what they did. They got a bunch of Chinese people to fill a stadium and cheer for AI and robotics. They're cheering for it. They're rooting for it.” David Sacks: “It is true that China is much more optimistic about AI than we are. AI optimism in China is over 80%. They poll on the question, ‘Do you think AI will be more beneficial than harmful?’ Over 80% of Chinese people say yes. In the US, that number is like 30%. So I've been saying for a while that the US is ahead of China in every category except one, which is optimism. And that is the biggest risk to us winning this AI race against China, is doing something that will shoot ourselves in the foot because we're so pessimistic about what AI might do.”

Sacks: China’s Biggest AI Advantage Over America Is Optimism @jason on China's Robot Olympics: “This is pretty crazy. The CCP is f**king brilliant at PR. Look what they did. They got a bunch of Chinese people to fill a stadium and cheer for AI and robotics. They're cheering for it. They're rooting for it.” David Sacks: “It is true that China is much more optimistic about AI than we are. AI optimism in China is over 80%. They poll on the question, ‘Do you think AI will be more beneficial than harmful?’ Over 80% of Chinese people say yes. In the US, that number is like 30%. So I've been saying for a while that the US is ahead of China in every category except one, which is optimism. And that is the biggest risk to us winning this AI race against China, is doing something that will shoot ourselves in the foot because we're so pessimistic about what AI might do.”

The All-In Podcast

58,016 次观看 • 26 天前

In a speech commemorating former Chinese President Jiang Zemin, Xi said: “In the late spring and early summer of 1989, a severe political disturbance took place in China.” The funniest myth is that “Tiananmen Square in 1989” is somehow “unspeakable” in China. It is spoken about. What Western anti-China discourse cannot tolerate is that China discusses its own history without adopting the political script the West wrote for it. If Beijing uses its own historical framing, that is called “censorship.” If Western institutions impose theirs, that is called “history.” There’s the trick. They do not demand that China remember 1989. They demand that China remember it in a way useful to them. China’s refusal to surrender narrative sovereignty is then repackaged as proof that the subject is “taboo.” The event is not the real taboo. China refusing to narrate itself through Western political needs is.

In a speech commemorating former Chinese President Jiang Zemin, Xi said: “In the late spring and early summer of 1989, a severe political disturbance took place in China.” The funniest myth is that “Tiananmen Square in 1989” is somehow “unspeakable” in China. It is spoken about. What Western anti-China discourse cannot tolerate is that China discusses its own history without adopting the political script the West wrote for it. If Beijing uses its own historical framing, that is called “censorship.” If Western institutions impose theirs, that is called “history.” There’s the trick. They do not demand that China remember 1989. They demand that China remember it in a way useful to them. China’s refusal to surrender narrative sovereignty is then repackaged as proof that the subject is “taboo.” The event is not the real taboo. China refusing to narrate itself through Western political needs is.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

53,871 次观看 • 1 个月前

AI is shaping the future whether we like it or not. Technology itself is not the problem. The problem is deploying powerful tools without guardrails, transparency, or accountability. AI should be a tool that works for people – not one that extracts value and burdens workers.

AI is shaping the future whether we like it or not. Technology itself is not the problem. The problem is deploying powerful tools without guardrails, transparency, or accountability. AI should be a tool that works for people – not one that extracts value and burdens workers.

Rep. Ilhan Omar

28,248 次观看 • 7 个月前

The truth about digital ID is that it is already here. The Brit Card is a distraction, a clever psyop to make people think they have stopped something, while the real system quietly embeds itself behind the scenes. When the time comes, will people stand up or bow down to the evil controllers? Because this is what it comes down to in the end. The system of total control is being built in plain sight, and many will take the mark willingly, believing it is for their safety or convenience. We all have to say no. No matter what the cost.

The truth about digital ID is that it is already here. The Brit Card is a distraction, a clever psyop to make people think they have stopped something, while the real system quietly embeds itself behind the scenes. When the time comes, will people stand up or bow down to the evil controllers? Because this is what it comes down to in the end. The system of total control is being built in plain sight, and many will take the mark willingly, believing it is for their safety or convenience. We all have to say no. No matter what the cost.

Doc Malik

72,310 次观看 • 11 个月前

Jensen Huang just told you America is in an AI arms race where half the talent building the weapons was born on the other side. Huang: “50% of the world’s AI researchers are from China. Taking it emotionally too far from that results in consequences in relationships that are just harder to manage.” That is not diplomacy. That is the CEO of the most critical company in the AI supply chain telling you the West has a structural dependency it cannot legislate away. Half the minds capable of engineering superintelligence were born, raised, and educated inside the borders of America’s primary geopolitical rival. And Washington is writing policy as if that number does not exist. The politician sees China and reaches for tariffs. Export bans. Visa restrictions. The instinct is confrontation. The endgame is severance. Huang is telling you severance is suicide. You cannot win an intelligence race by amputating half the intelligence. America does not lead AI because of its government. It leads because the best researchers on Earth chose to be here. The compute. The capital. The culture of building. That pull is not permanent. The moment it reverses, the talent does not disappear. It goes home. And it takes the knowledge with it. Every emotionally driven export ban. Every reactionary visa restriction. Every congressional hearing staged for cameras instead of outcomes. Each one is a small push in the wrong direction on a scale that does not forgive miscalculation. China is not debating whether the technology moves too fast. They are building gigawatt-scale data centers and training sovereign models with the full weight of a state that treats AI supremacy as civilizational survival. And they are doing it with a researcher pipeline that America helped build and is now actively dismantling. Huang: “We can have a healthy competition while we compete, compete fairly, and collaborate at the same time.” That sounds reasonable until you hear what he is actually saying. The only path to American AI dominance runs directly through a relationship with the country trying to beat it. That does not fit on a campaign poster. But it is the math. The AI race is not a tariff negotiation. It is the final competition for who writes the operating system every future economy, military, and government runs on. Whoever builds superintelligence first does not get a market advantage. They get a permanent one. The kind no treaty undoes. And America is treating this like a midterm election issue while China is treating it like the last war it will ever need to fight. The danger is not that China outspends the U.S. The danger is that America mistakes emotional foreign policy for strategic foreign policy and severs the very relationships keeping it ahead. The researchers are the resource. Not the chips. Not the data centers. The people who know how to make the models think. Half of them are Chinese. And the U.S. is running a geopolitical strategy that forces those people to choose. Huang sees the board. He sells the GPUs. He knows who is buying them and who is designing on them. And he is telling you the current trajectory ends with America holding the best hardware on Earth and no one left who knows how to use it. The country that wins this will not be the one with the strongest rhetoric. It will be the one that understood the difference between controlling talent and attracting it. Right now, China is attracting. America is restricting. The algorithm does not care about flags. It scales for whoever shows up with the math. And right now, half the people who know the math are being told they are not welcome.

Jensen Huang just told you America is in an AI arms race where half the talent building the weapons was born on the other side. Huang: “50% of the world’s AI researchers are from China. Taking it emotionally too far from that results in consequences in relationships that are just harder to manage.” That is not diplomacy. That is the CEO of the most critical company in the AI supply chain telling you the West has a structural dependency it cannot legislate away. Half the minds capable of engineering superintelligence were born, raised, and educated inside the borders of America’s primary geopolitical rival. And Washington is writing policy as if that number does not exist. The politician sees China and reaches for tariffs. Export bans. Visa restrictions. The instinct is confrontation. The endgame is severance. Huang is telling you severance is suicide. You cannot win an intelligence race by amputating half the intelligence. America does not lead AI because of its government. It leads because the best researchers on Earth chose to be here. The compute. The capital. The culture of building. That pull is not permanent. The moment it reverses, the talent does not disappear. It goes home. And it takes the knowledge with it. Every emotionally driven export ban. Every reactionary visa restriction. Every congressional hearing staged for cameras instead of outcomes. Each one is a small push in the wrong direction on a scale that does not forgive miscalculation. China is not debating whether the technology moves too fast. They are building gigawatt-scale data centers and training sovereign models with the full weight of a state that treats AI supremacy as civilizational survival. And they are doing it with a researcher pipeline that America helped build and is now actively dismantling. Huang: “We can have a healthy competition while we compete, compete fairly, and collaborate at the same time.” That sounds reasonable until you hear what he is actually saying. The only path to American AI dominance runs directly through a relationship with the country trying to beat it. That does not fit on a campaign poster. But it is the math. The AI race is not a tariff negotiation. It is the final competition for who writes the operating system every future economy, military, and government runs on. Whoever builds superintelligence first does not get a market advantage. They get a permanent one. The kind no treaty undoes. And America is treating this like a midterm election issue while China is treating it like the last war it will ever need to fight. The danger is not that China outspends the U.S. The danger is that America mistakes emotional foreign policy for strategic foreign policy and severs the very relationships keeping it ahead. The researchers are the resource. Not the chips. Not the data centers. The people who know how to make the models think. Half of them are Chinese. And the U.S. is running a geopolitical strategy that forces those people to choose. Huang sees the board. He sells the GPUs. He knows who is buying them and who is designing on them. And he is telling you the current trajectory ends with America holding the best hardware on Earth and no one left who knows how to use it. The country that wins this will not be the one with the strongest rhetoric. It will be the one that understood the difference between controlling talent and attracting it. Right now, China is attracting. America is restricting. The algorithm does not care about flags. It scales for whoever shows up with the math. And right now, half the people who know the math are being told they are not welcome.

Dustin

10,925 次观看 • 5 个月前

"THE AMERICAN PEOPLE MUST PREPARE FOR WAR" Chinese leader Xi Jinping is preparing China for war. What makes me wonder is why the US is not preparing its citizens for a conflict with China. If Xi Jinping says that China is going to war, the question is who will China go to war with. The reasonable thing is that it is Taiwan and indirectly the US that is the enemy. China and North Korea are preparing their citizens for war while the US seems to live in some form of denial. I am convinced that the US is preparing militarily for a conflict. However, you also have to take responsibility for your citizens. What are your thoughts? 📌#China #Taiwan

"THE AMERICAN PEOPLE MUST PREPARE FOR WAR" Chinese leader Xi Jinping is preparing China for war. What makes me wonder is why the US is not preparing its citizens for a conflict with China. If Xi Jinping says that China is going to war, the question is who will China go to war with. The reasonable thing is that it is Taiwan and indirectly the US that is the enemy. China and North Korea are preparing their citizens for war while the US seems to live in some form of denial. I am convinced that the US is preparing militarily for a conflict. However, you also have to take responsibility for your citizens. What are your thoughts? 📌#China #Taiwan

Global Strategy

91,558 次观看 • 1 年前

Reporter: Were you worried about the 145% tariffs were doing to small businesses in the U.S.? Trump: No.. I said it is a high tariff, but I have not brought it down. It means China is not doing any business with us because it is a very high number. China is not doing any business. They were doing $1.1 trillion. Think of that. 1.1 trillion dollars. Do you know what that is? It was very unfair to us

Reporter: Were you worried about the 145% tariffs were doing to small businesses in the U.S.? Trump: No.. I said it is a high tariff, but I have not brought it down. It means China is not doing any business with us because it is a very high number. China is not doing any business. They were doing $1.1 trillion. Think of that. 1.1 trillion dollars. Do you know what that is? It was very unfair to us

Acyn

1,181,859 次观看 • 1 年前

My proposed strategy involves great respect for China. The future for China if a strategy of denial works is to be one of the world’s two superpowers; it would command great respect and influence. Is that not a better outcome than risking it all in a major war?

My proposed strategy involves great respect for China. The future for China if a strategy of denial works is to be one of the world’s two superpowers; it would command great respect and influence. Is that not a better outcome than risking it all in a major war?

Elbridge Colby

132,903 次观看 • 3 年前