Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Vance is making a very American mistake: he is confusing overlapping interests with obedience. China does not want the Strait of Hormuz turned into a toll booth. China does not want nuclear proliferation. China has reasons to keep relations with Washington stable. None of that means Beijing has agreed...

OopsGuess's profile picture

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

57,516 subscribers

15,765 просмотров • 3 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Bessent just admitted the quiet part: everyone else is afraid of U.S. sanctions, but China kept buying Iranian oil. That is what real support looks like. Not hashtags. Not empty “rules-based order” sermons. Not performative outrage from anti-China colonial pets. When Trump bombed Iran, blocked Hormuz, and tried to choke Tehran economically, they laughed and said China had lost its cheap oil. Then they mocked China for “not helping Iran.” But helping a country does not always mean sending troops. Sometimes it means keeping its economy breathing when Washington tries to suffocate it. China’s demand, industry, and payment networks gave Iran enough room to survive the pressure until America could no longer drag out a war it could not afford. And then Washington had to sign a ceasefire so humiliating that even MAGA called it surrender. China did not need to fire a missile. It bought oil. It kept trade alive. That is why sanctions did not become a death sentence. That is why empire hates China: because China does not ask permission to keep another country standing.
0:28

Bessent just admitted the quiet part: everyone else is afraid of U.S. sanctions, but China kept buying Iranian oil. That is what real support looks like. Not hashtags. Not empty “rules-based order” sermons. Not performative outrage from anti-China colonial pets. When Trump bombed Iran, blocked Hormuz, and tried to choke Tehran economically, they laughed and said China had lost its cheap oil. Then they mocked China for “not helping Iran.” But helping a country does not always mean sending troops. Sometimes it means keeping its economy breathing when Washington tries to suffocate it. China’s demand, industry, and payment networks gave Iran enough room to survive the pressure until America could no longer drag out a war it could not afford. And then Washington had to sign a ceasefire so humiliating that even MAGA called it surrender. China did not need to fire a missile. It bought oil. It kept trade alive. That is why sanctions did not become a death sentence. That is why empire hates China: because China does not ask permission to keep another country standing.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

11,546 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Trump wants China against Iran? FORGET IT. Beijing is not dumping Tehran for Washington. At best, China may offer Trump a face-saving way to negotiate an exit — not a green light for more pressure.
1:22

Trump wants China against Iran? FORGET IT. Beijing is not dumping Tehran for Washington. At best, China may offer Trump a face-saving way to negotiate an exit — not a green light for more pressure.

Rick Sanchez

26,877 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

🚨 AMERICA CANNOT STOP CHINA 🚨 Tarik Cyril Amar argues that Rubio’s claim that Washington does not want to contain China is a strategic deception. For years, the United States tried tariffs, chip restrictions, technological pressure, and economic warfare, not only to slow China down but to force it into backward development. But China defeated that strategy. Now Washington says China may rise, but “not at America’s expense.” The problem is that China’s rise is the natural outcome of a state investing in prosperity, industry, technology, and national development. And even if China stood still, America’s decline would still make China look stronger by comparison. But the American empire wants to blame China for a decline created by its own ruling class. .Tarik Cyril Amar .Syriana Analysis
5:30

🚨 AMERICA CANNOT STOP CHINA 🚨 Tarik Cyril Amar argues that Rubio’s claim that Washington does not want to contain China is a strategic deception. For years, the United States tried tariffs, chip restrictions, technological pressure, and economic warfare, not only to slow China down but to force it into backward development. But China defeated that strategy. Now Washington says China may rise, but “not at America’s expense.” The problem is that China’s rise is the natural outcome of a state investing in prosperity, industry, technology, and national development. And even if China stood still, America’s decline would still make China look stronger by comparison. But the American empire wants to blame China for a decline created by its own ruling class. .Tarik Cyril Amar .Syriana Analysis

Kevork Almassian

19,145 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

China warns that mishandling the Taiwan question risks bilateral ties, even after “strategic stability” talks with Trump. So things are very clear: Trump may flatter. Washington may smile. The banquet may be magnificent. But China’s red lines do not move. Taiwan is not a deal. It is a core interest. This is what America still struggles to understand: China does not rewrite national strategy because one foreign leader is having a good day. Some call this rigidity. China calls it strategic stability. A civilization that survives for thousands of years knows what must never be negotiated.
1:19

China warns that mishandling the Taiwan question risks bilateral ties, even after “strategic stability” talks with Trump. So things are very clear: Trump may flatter. Washington may smile. The banquet may be magnificent. But China’s red lines do not move. Taiwan is not a deal. It is a core interest. This is what America still struggles to understand: China does not rewrite national strategy because one foreign leader is having a good day. Some call this rigidity. China calls it strategic stability. A civilization that survives for thousands of years knows what must never be negotiated.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

11,023 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Argentina's Milei: The United States does trade with China, and the way we see it, China is a great trading partner. It means a lot of opportunities for us to expand markets, so that is not any source of conflict.
0:32

Argentina's Milei: The United States does trade with China, and the way we see it, China is a great trading partner. It means a lot of opportunities for us to expand markets, so that is not any source of conflict.

Clash Report

38,170 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump has barely launched Operation Economic Outcast against Iran, and China is already calling his bluff. Beijing says it will not comply, and is threatening retaliation if Washington targets Chinese companies for continuing to trade with Tehran. That's a HUGE problem for Trump's strategy. Operation Economic Outcast is supposed to sever the international financial lifelines keeping Tehran alive. But Iran cannot be economically isolated if major trading partners simply refuse to participate. Washington can sanction Iran, but the real test has always been whether it is prepared to sanction the powerful countries that keep doing business with it. China has now effectively dared Trump to try. Meanwhile, Iran and Oman have announced a preliminary agreement over managing the Strait of Hormuz. Iran would control incoming maritime traffic and retain the right to impose service fees, while outbound traffic would use the Omani corridor. Crucially, Tehran says the agreement does not mean Hormuz is immediately reopening. Iran says the Strait will remain closed until the U.S naval blockade is lifted and the terms of the broader MOU are honoured. And there are signs Washington may already be moving in that direction. According to an Al Arabiya report, Pakistan's Asim Munir conveyed an American proposal to Tehran: Washington is prepared to lift the naval blockade and sanctions if Iran guarantees free passage through Hormuz and pressures the Houthis to stop attacking Saudi energy infrastructure. There is another important signal. The State Department is reportedly preparing to return diplomats to a string of Middle Eastern embassies evacuated during the war, suggesting Washington does not currently expect large-scale fighting to resume. Put all of this together, and Trump's strategy starts looking very different from the rhetoric; the direction of travel today may actually be toward a deal. Brandon Weichert
43:41

🇺🇸🇮🇷 Trump has barely launched Operation Economic Outcast against Iran, and China is already calling his bluff. Beijing says it will not comply, and is threatening retaliation if Washington targets Chinese companies for continuing to trade with Tehran. That's a HUGE problem for Trump's strategy. Operation Economic Outcast is supposed to sever the international financial lifelines keeping Tehran alive. But Iran cannot be economically isolated if major trading partners simply refuse to participate. Washington can sanction Iran, but the real test has always been whether it is prepared to sanction the powerful countries that keep doing business with it. China has now effectively dared Trump to try. Meanwhile, Iran and Oman have announced a preliminary agreement over managing the Strait of Hormuz. Iran would control incoming maritime traffic and retain the right to impose service fees, while outbound traffic would use the Omani corridor. Crucially, Tehran says the agreement does not mean Hormuz is immediately reopening. Iran says the Strait will remain closed until the U.S naval blockade is lifted and the terms of the broader MOU are honoured. And there are signs Washington may already be moving in that direction. According to an Al Arabiya report, Pakistan's Asim Munir conveyed an American proposal to Tehran: Washington is prepared to lift the naval blockade and sanctions if Iran guarantees free passage through Hormuz and pressures the Houthis to stop attacking Saudi energy infrastructure. There is another important signal. The State Department is reportedly preparing to return diplomats to a string of Middle Eastern embassies evacuated during the war, suggesting Washington does not currently expect large-scale fighting to resume. Put all of this together, and Trump's strategy starts looking very different from the rhetoric; the direction of travel today may actually be toward a deal. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

268,386 просмотров • 14 дней назад

Mearsheimer is honest about power. He dares to say the quiet part of Western politics out loud: international relations are not a fairy tale of “good guys” and “bad guys”, but a naked struggle for survival, security, and dominance. That is why, to him, there is no moral distinction between America and China. But he still misunderstands China. His offensive realism has one fixed Western code: • A great power must seek regional hegemony. • A great power must push others into dependence. • A great power must turn its neighborhood into a Monroe Doctrine. So when he sees China rise, he assumes China must want to become America in Asia. That is where he gets China wrong. America’s strategy is exclusion. It cannot tolerate another strong power in its own hemisphere. That is why Cuba, Venezuela, and any independent force in Latin America become permanent targets. China’s strategy is not a Chinese Monroe Doctrine. China’s priority is stability around itself, because China’s own development requires peace, trade, logistics, markets, energy routes, and regional order. But stability does not mean turning neighbors into colonies. It does not mean hundreds of military bases. It does not mean color revolutions, proxy wars, sanctions, coups, and permanent ideological containment. China spent forty years building roads, ports, factories, power grids, railways, supply chains, and markets. America exported war. China exported infrastructure. America’s model is control. China’s model is connectivity. That is why Western realists often misread China. They assume interest maximization must mean domination. They assume security must mean exclusion. They assume strength must become hegemony. But China’s civilizational instinct is different. China does not need every country to become Chinese. It does not need every neighbor to become a satellite. It does not need to export ideology, stage revolutions, or install puppet regimes. China’s highest security is not ruling everyone around it. It is building a region where trade, development, and interdependence make war too expensive and chaos too stupid. Mearsheimer is right that great powers compete. But he is wrong to assume every great power dreams in American grammar. China does not want to become America in Asia. China wants Asia to stop being America’s battlefield.
5:26

Mearsheimer is honest about power. He dares to say the quiet part of Western politics out loud: international relations are not a fairy tale of “good guys” and “bad guys”, but a naked struggle for survival, security, and dominance. That is why, to him, there is no moral distinction between America and China. But he still misunderstands China. His offensive realism has one fixed Western code: • A great power must seek regional hegemony. • A great power must push others into dependence. • A great power must turn its neighborhood into a Monroe Doctrine. So when he sees China rise, he assumes China must want to become America in Asia. That is where he gets China wrong. America’s strategy is exclusion. It cannot tolerate another strong power in its own hemisphere. That is why Cuba, Venezuela, and any independent force in Latin America become permanent targets. China’s strategy is not a Chinese Monroe Doctrine. China’s priority is stability around itself, because China’s own development requires peace, trade, logistics, markets, energy routes, and regional order. But stability does not mean turning neighbors into colonies. It does not mean hundreds of military bases. It does not mean color revolutions, proxy wars, sanctions, coups, and permanent ideological containment. China spent forty years building roads, ports, factories, power grids, railways, supply chains, and markets. America exported war. China exported infrastructure. America’s model is control. China’s model is connectivity. That is why Western realists often misread China. They assume interest maximization must mean domination. They assume security must mean exclusion. They assume strength must become hegemony. But China’s civilizational instinct is different. China does not need every country to become Chinese. It does not need every neighbor to become a satellite. It does not need to export ideology, stage revolutions, or install puppet regimes. China’s highest security is not ruling everyone around it. It is building a region where trade, development, and interdependence make war too expensive and chaos too stupid. Mearsheimer is right that great powers compete. But he is wrong to assume every great power dreams in American grammar. China does not want to become America in Asia. China wants Asia to stop being America’s battlefield.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

14,030 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

💥 Carl Zha Explains How China Would Really Fight the United States 💥 Carl Zha argues that people fundamentally misunderstand how China approaches confrontation with the United States because they keep imagining a Hollywood-style military showdown where Chinese fleets sail around the world to fight America symmetrically. But China’s real strength is not global military projection. Its real strength is economic power, industrial dominance, and control over supply chains the U.S. itself depends on. That is why, when Washington escalated the tariff war and sanctions campaign, Beijing responded not by trying to mirror American military behavior, but by targeting areas where the U.S. is structurally vulnerable. Rare earth exports. Industrial supply chains. Access to materials essential for the F-35, Patriot missiles, and large parts of the American military-industrial complex. For example, China openly instructed companies operating inside China not to comply with U.S. secondary sanctions targeting Iranian oil trade. In other words, Beijing signaled that American law does not possess automatic extraterritorial authority inside China anymore. That is a major shift in the global balance of economic power. Carl Zha says China does not need to defeat the United States by copying the American model of empire. It fights where it is strongest: production, industry, trade, and economic leverage. Because in a world still dependent on Chinese goods, Beijing understands that economic warfare may matter more than aircraft carriers. .Carl Zha .Syriana Analysis
4:21

💥 Carl Zha Explains How China Would Really Fight the United States 💥 Carl Zha argues that people fundamentally misunderstand how China approaches confrontation with the United States because they keep imagining a Hollywood-style military showdown where Chinese fleets sail around the world to fight America symmetrically. But China’s real strength is not global military projection. Its real strength is economic power, industrial dominance, and control over supply chains the U.S. itself depends on. That is why, when Washington escalated the tariff war and sanctions campaign, Beijing responded not by trying to mirror American military behavior, but by targeting areas where the U.S. is structurally vulnerable. Rare earth exports. Industrial supply chains. Access to materials essential for the F-35, Patriot missiles, and large parts of the American military-industrial complex. For example, China openly instructed companies operating inside China not to comply with U.S. secondary sanctions targeting Iranian oil trade. In other words, Beijing signaled that American law does not possess automatic extraterritorial authority inside China anymore. That is a major shift in the global balance of economic power. Carl Zha says China does not need to defeat the United States by copying the American model of empire. It fights where it is strongest: production, industry, trade, and economic leverage. Because in a world still dependent on Chinese goods, Beijing understands that economic warfare may matter more than aircraft carriers. .Carl Zha .Syriana Analysis

Kevork Almassian

37,107 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

The West spent years trying to isolate China. Now their own leaders keep flying to Beijing. That is the quiet humiliation of every containment fantasy. You can smear China. Sanction China. Lecture China. Photoshop maps where China is supposed to be isolated. Then the planes land in Beijing anyway. Real power does not beg for relevance. It creates gravity.
8:56

The West spent years trying to isolate China. Now their own leaders keep flying to Beijing. That is the quiet humiliation of every containment fantasy. You can smear China. Sanction China. Lecture China. Photoshop maps where China is supposed to be isolated. Then the planes land in Beijing anyway. Real power does not beg for relevance. It creates gravity.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

17,662 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

🚨MAJOR BREAKING TRADE DEVASTATION FOR TRUMP China spokesman Guo Jiakun says that Trump’s “blackmail” negotiation tactics will NEVER work with China. “A deal while exerting extreme pressure is not the right way to deal with China and simply will not work.” It gets worse: Jiakun also called media reports and claims by Trump that he has spoken with China and are close to a deal is what he called, “FAKE NEWS.” “We have made it very clear that China does not look for a war, but neither are we afraid of it. We will fight, if fight we must.” Art of the deal. 🤡
0:53

🚨MAJOR BREAKING TRADE DEVASTATION FOR TRUMP China spokesman Guo Jiakun says that Trump’s “blackmail” negotiation tactics will NEVER work with China. “A deal while exerting extreme pressure is not the right way to deal with China and simply will not work.” It gets worse: Jiakun also called media reports and claims by Trump that he has spoken with China and are close to a deal is what he called, “FAKE NEWS.” “We have made it very clear that China does not look for a war, but neither are we afraid of it. We will fight, if fight we must.” Art of the deal. 🤡

CALL TO ACTIVISM

562,121 просмотров • 1 год назад

🇺🇸🇨🇳 Beijing doesn’t necessarily need to confront Washington directly as the global order fractures. It can simply wait. “Never interrupt an enemy when he’s making a mistake.” While Washington increasingly relies on military and economic coercion, Martenson says China is offering countries an alternative built around trade, manufacturing and long-term investment. His argument is that the multipolar world may not arrive because China defeats America. America may be helping build it. Chris Martenson
2:05

🇺🇸🇨🇳 Beijing doesn’t necessarily need to confront Washington directly as the global order fractures. It can simply wait. “Never interrupt an enemy when he’s making a mistake.” While Washington increasingly relies on military and economic coercion, Martenson says China is offering countries an alternative built around trade, manufacturing and long-term investment. His argument is that the multipolar world may not arrive because China defeats America. America may be helping build it. Chris Martenson

Mario Nawfal

56,155 просмотров • 23 часов назад

US Senator on the difference between India and China "When I travel to China, my phone does not go to Beijing with me. It stays in Washington. But when I travel to India, this phone comes with me. That is an example of a highly trusted ally and friend. I can't do that in China."
0:48

US Senator on the difference between India and China "When I travel to China, my phone does not go to Beijing with me. It stays in Washington. But when I travel to India, this phone comes with me. That is an example of a highly trusted ally and friend. I can't do that in China."

Shashank Mattoo

1,233,361 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇷 STRAIT OF HORMUZ: STRATEGIC WIN OR LOSS FOR IRAN? Veteran & geopolitical analyst Matt Tardio breaks down the Hormuz standoff. Trump promised to open the Strait of Hormuz. It didn't happen. Allies were asked to help. Every single one said no. Tardio argues, however, that it's not a clean win for Iran either. The US is already de-mining the strait and preparing a new shipping lane. Iran can't stop that if American naval power is focused. And the real pressure point? China: 40% of Chinese oil flows through Hormuz. It was China that ultimately called Iran to seal the deal, making it clear that the decision to keep the Strait of Hormuz locked won't be a straightforward one for Iran. Matt Tardio
4:57

🚨🇺🇸🇮🇷 STRAIT OF HORMUZ: STRATEGIC WIN OR LOSS FOR IRAN? Veteran & geopolitical analyst Matt Tardio breaks down the Hormuz standoff. Trump promised to open the Strait of Hormuz. It didn't happen. Allies were asked to help. Every single one said no. Tardio argues, however, that it's not a clean win for Iran either. The US is already de-mining the strait and preparing a new shipping lane. Iran can't stop that if American naval power is focused. And the real pressure point? China: 40% of Chinese oil flows through Hormuz. It was China that ultimately called Iran to seal the deal, making it clear that the decision to keep the Strait of Hormuz locked won't be a straightforward one for Iran. Matt Tardio

Mario Nawfal

80,248 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

China Is Desperate, and Iran Is Their Only Move Left 🚨 "If you're cornering me and I'm China... I have to make sure Iran makes it. I have to be on Iran’s side." "What is the worst thing that can happen to China? We control the Strait of Hormuz. If the US controls Kharg Island and the Strait... that's a very rough place for China."
2:35

China Is Desperate, and Iran Is Their Only Move Left 🚨 "If you're cornering me and I'm China... I have to make sure Iran makes it. I have to be on Iran’s side." "What is the worst thing that can happen to China? We control the Strait of Hormuz. If the US controls Kharg Island and the Strait... that's a very rough place for China."

PBD Podcast

78,850 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

China has banned the export of all dual-use items to Japanese military users and for Japan’s military use. The aim is to contain Japan’s remilitarization and its attempt to possess nuclear weapons, said the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Sanae Takaichi lamented at the G7 that China’s rare earth sanctions are affecting Japan’s economy. This is the same person who openly threatened China by saying that “a Taiwan emergency is a Japan emergency.” A defeated fascist state, once disarmed by the anti-fascist order after turning Asia into a slaughterhouse, is now trying to insert itself into China’s internal affairs and present that as “security.” Then when China responds with economic measures, Japan plays the victim. Classic. Japan should be glad that China is not the United States. If a foreign leader said “a Cuba emergency is our emergency” to Washington, the U.S. would not respond with polite export controls. It would call it a national security threat, sanction everyone involved, send warships, threaten regime change, and may even kidnap that leader and his family within a week, drag them back to the United States, and try them on drug trafficking charges. Trump attacked Iran for months under the excuse that Iran must not even have the chance to build a nuclear weapon. Iran did not say “Cuba is our emergency.” Iran did not invade the U.S. Iran did not station forces near Florida. Yet Washington bombed Tehran, assassinated Khamenei, blockaded Hormuz, and called it security. Japan, meanwhile, openly links itself to Taiwan, challenges China’s sovereignty, pushes remilitarization, flirts with nuclear ambitions, and then cries when China restricts dual-use exports. Japan should understand one thing very clearly: China’s economic measures are restraint. Perhaps too restrained. That is exactly why Japan dares to challenge China’s core red lines of sovereignty again and again. In the end, a defeated militarist power does not get to threaten the victorious country, interfere in its territorial question, and then demand uninterrupted access to strategic materials. If Japan wants stable relations with China, it should stop pretending dialogue means China staying silent while Tokyo rearms, provokes, and hides behind the G7. China is indeed not the United States. That is why Japan is still being warned through economic tools instead of being treated the way Washington treats countries that cross its red lines.
2:02

China has banned the export of all dual-use items to Japanese military users and for Japan’s military use. The aim is to contain Japan’s remilitarization and its attempt to possess nuclear weapons, said the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Sanae Takaichi lamented at the G7 that China’s rare earth sanctions are affecting Japan’s economy. This is the same person who openly threatened China by saying that “a Taiwan emergency is a Japan emergency.” A defeated fascist state, once disarmed by the anti-fascist order after turning Asia into a slaughterhouse, is now trying to insert itself into China’s internal affairs and present that as “security.” Then when China responds with economic measures, Japan plays the victim. Classic. Japan should be glad that China is not the United States. If a foreign leader said “a Cuba emergency is our emergency” to Washington, the U.S. would not respond with polite export controls. It would call it a national security threat, sanction everyone involved, send warships, threaten regime change, and may even kidnap that leader and his family within a week, drag them back to the United States, and try them on drug trafficking charges. Trump attacked Iran for months under the excuse that Iran must not even have the chance to build a nuclear weapon. Iran did not say “Cuba is our emergency.” Iran did not invade the U.S. Iran did not station forces near Florida. Yet Washington bombed Tehran, assassinated Khamenei, blockaded Hormuz, and called it security. Japan, meanwhile, openly links itself to Taiwan, challenges China’s sovereignty, pushes remilitarization, flirts with nuclear ambitions, and then cries when China restricts dual-use exports. Japan should understand one thing very clearly: China’s economic measures are restraint. Perhaps too restrained. That is exactly why Japan dares to challenge China’s core red lines of sovereignty again and again. In the end, a defeated militarist power does not get to threaten the victorious country, interfere in its territorial question, and then demand uninterrupted access to strategic materials. If Japan wants stable relations with China, it should stop pretending dialogue means China staying silent while Tokyo rearms, provokes, and hides behind the G7. China is indeed not the United States. That is why Japan is still being warned through economic tools instead of being treated the way Washington treats countries that cross its red lines.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

23,164 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🇺🇸🇨🇳 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
5:21

🇺🇸🇨🇳 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

90,569 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Rubio’s entire statement can be translated into one paragraph: America preached free markets when it was winning. Now that China is succeeding under the rules Washington claimed to worship, competition becomes “Chinese aggression,” industrial policy becomes “cheating,” and American decline becomes someone else’s crime. China never showed much interest in becoming the world’s policeman. It would much rather let the United States stand in front, absorb the anger, finance the wars, patrol the oceans, and exhaust itself—while China develops, trades, builds, and moves forward. Washington’s real problem is not that China wants to replace it. It is that America cannot tolerate any country becoming strong enough to ignore its permission. The Soviet Union. Germany. Japan. The European Union. Whenever another power rises, American paranoia activates. It does not compete. It sanctions. Blocks. Threatens. Cuts access. Weaponizes finance. Then calls the damage “defending the rules-based order.” But China is the opponent Washington was never psychologically prepared for. The more it is contained, the more it substitutes. The more it is sanctioned, the more it builds. The more it is denied, the more it learns to live without America. The United States has no memory of rebuilding from national ruin. China does. That is why Washington experiences setbacks as humiliation, while China experiences them as instructions. And Rubio’s Taiwan remarks expose the fraud behind Washington’s language of “stability.” The United States says it opposes any change to the status quo—not because the status quo is sacred, but because permanent division serves American power. China is expected to tolerate separatism, foreign arms, political interference, and an island turned into a strategic pressure point indefinitely. Washington calls that “peace.” But any attempt by China to end the arrangement becomes “coercion.” So Rubio’s message is simple: We lost the free-market competition we claimed to believe in. China kept advancing despite our attempts to stop it. Direct confrontation is becoming too dangerous. But we still intend to preserve every geopolitical advantage created by Chinese division. America is not asking for stability because it has accepted China. It is asking for a strategic pause while keeping Taiwan frozen as leverage. Containment failed. The appetite for containment did not.
3:52

Rubio’s entire statement can be translated into one paragraph: America preached free markets when it was winning. Now that China is succeeding under the rules Washington claimed to worship, competition becomes “Chinese aggression,” industrial policy becomes “cheating,” and American decline becomes someone else’s crime. China never showed much interest in becoming the world’s policeman. It would much rather let the United States stand in front, absorb the anger, finance the wars, patrol the oceans, and exhaust itself—while China develops, trades, builds, and moves forward. Washington’s real problem is not that China wants to replace it. It is that America cannot tolerate any country becoming strong enough to ignore its permission. The Soviet Union. Germany. Japan. The European Union. Whenever another power rises, American paranoia activates. It does not compete. It sanctions. Blocks. Threatens. Cuts access. Weaponizes finance. Then calls the damage “defending the rules-based order.” But China is the opponent Washington was never psychologically prepared for. The more it is contained, the more it substitutes. The more it is sanctioned, the more it builds. The more it is denied, the more it learns to live without America. The United States has no memory of rebuilding from national ruin. China does. That is why Washington experiences setbacks as humiliation, while China experiences them as instructions. And Rubio’s Taiwan remarks expose the fraud behind Washington’s language of “stability.” The United States says it opposes any change to the status quo—not because the status quo is sacred, but because permanent division serves American power. China is expected to tolerate separatism, foreign arms, political interference, and an island turned into a strategic pressure point indefinitely. Washington calls that “peace.” But any attempt by China to end the arrangement becomes “coercion.” So Rubio’s message is simple: We lost the free-market competition we claimed to believe in. China kept advancing despite our attempts to stop it. Direct confrontation is becoming too dangerous. But we still intend to preserve every geopolitical advantage created by Chinese division. America is not asking for stability because it has accepted China. It is asking for a strategic pause while keeping Taiwan frozen as leverage. Containment failed. The appetite for containment did not.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

36,226 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🚨🇺🇸🇨🇳 Trump came home from Beijing claiming China agreed to buy American soybeans, but there's no quantity, no commitment, and no deal. Ex-CIA Larry Johnson says China already buys all the soybeans it needs from Brazil. It was only buying American soybeans as a favor to the U.S., and that mindset is gone. With fertilizer shortages now biting, American farmers may not even be able to produce what China supposedly agreed to consider buying. China's message to Washington is simple: lift the blockade and get out of the Middle East. SonofNewAmericanRevolution
1:12

🚨🇺🇸🇨🇳 Trump came home from Beijing claiming China agreed to buy American soybeans, but there's no quantity, no commitment, and no deal. Ex-CIA Larry Johnson says China already buys all the soybeans it needs from Brazil. It was only buying American soybeans as a favor to the U.S., and that mindset is gone. With fertilizer shortages now biting, American farmers may not even be able to produce what China supposedly agreed to consider buying. China's message to Washington is simple: lift the blockade and get out of the Middle East. SonofNewAmericanRevolution

Mario Nawfal

46,531 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

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.
2:06

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

235,707 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад