[Asia/Oceania] Another pro-China propaganda outlet revealed to be a huge scam:

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > [Asia/Oceania] Another pro-China propaganda outlet revealed to be a huge scam:

«‹›3019 »

(Thread IKs: fart simpson)

Tankbuster: Oct 1, 2021

gradenko_2000 posted:

https://twitter.com/coachchito/status/1568094633112276993
https://twitter.com/mantitoy/status/1568137468683374592
https://twitter.com/rolandmcjr/status/1568157374841606144

Gigantic Pinoy liberal brain:

Actually if you ignore the only relevant colony britain ever had, it turned out to be brettygud

# ? Sep 9, 2022 13:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 6, 2024 14:47

ikanreed: Sep 25, 2009; I honestly I have no idea who cannibal[SIC] is and I do not know why I should know.

syq dude, just syq!

And you have to be pretty stupid to think the US is overall a progressive place.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 13:39

Tankbuster: Oct 1, 2021

The US sets the terms for progressiveness, and for a part of history it was progressive compared to europe with it's inbred monarchs.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 14:24

VomitOnLino: Jun 13, 2005; Sometimes I get lost.

ikanreed posted:

And you have to be pretty stupid to think the US is overall a progressive place.

"I sure wish these were US boots on my neck..." -Idiot liberals

# ? Sep 9, 2022 14:27

indigi: Jul 20, 2004; ^{how can we not talk about family

when family's all that we got?}

gradenko_2000 posted:

there's a strong strain here of wishful thinking about how "if only it was Britain and not Spain, we could have been more like Australia or Canada"

very interesting, cause what do they think the differences are between eg Canada and the Philippines? in the English "success stories" barring Hong Kong (which isn't readily comparable to either) the natives are still subjugated and invisible from the national scene. do they think that's just a coincidence?

# ? Sep 9, 2022 14:28

ikanreed: Sep 25, 2009; I honestly I have no idea who cannibal[SIC] is and I do not know why I should know.

syq dude, just syq!

Tankbuster posted:

The US sets the terms for progressiveness, and for a part of history it was progressive compared to europe with it's inbred monarchs.

It took Germany a century to catch up with our industrialized genocide politics.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 14:37

Tankbuster: Oct 1, 2021

ikanreed posted:

It took Germany a century to catch up with our industrialized genocide politics.

With far less success. Guess Anglo Saxons are just built different.

indigi posted:

very interesting, cause what do they think the differences are between eg Canada and the Philippines? in the English "success stories" barring Hong Kong (which isn't readily comparable to either) the natives are still subjugated and invisible from the national scene. do they think that's just a coincidence?

They just cherrypick datasets. Notice that the dumbfucks completely ignore the vast majority of the population of the british empire - it's subcontinent size holding.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 14:38

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

indigi posted:

very interesting, cause what do they think the differences are between eg Canada and the Philippines? in the English "success stories" barring Hong Kong (which isn't readily comparable to either) the natives are still subjugated and invisible from the national scene. do they think that's just a coincidence?

basically it's just this vague idea of "Canada is technologically and economically developed, and life is good there, and the government isn't complete poo poo, and I wish we had some of that"

and yeah, that's hardly accurate even in the general idea of "is the government good" even before you apply a lens of "what happened to the indigenuous population", but people who spout this kind of thing don't think about it much deeper than "well look at all the people who emigrate to Canada and make dollars there"

# ? Sep 9, 2022 14:40

stephenthinkpad: Jan 2, 2020

The difference between Spanish colonies and British colonies in Americans is that the Spanish got warmer and better farming land in the south but didn't kill all the indigenous people, while the Brits colonizers killed all the indigenous people, therefore has less population to share the resource in the new land.

That, and Puritans etc are cults, the cultists like to save money. The capital accumulation kicked start the industrialization sooner.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 14:42

ThatBasqueGuy: Feb 14, 2013; someone introduce jojo to lazyb

stephenthinkpad posted:

I think the British really got lucky with India, which was a golden goose. So the Brits built their later strategies around maintaining India (including the great game wars against Russia and wars in Afghanistan, expedition in Tibet) and also was looking for new colonies like India, but they never found a similar golden goose ever again.

So the British empire probably could have lasted longer and fallen in more peaceful fashion if they never colonized India.

It was a golden goose, but they also absolutely didn't have the capacity to maintain another. Like, there was almost certainly the opportunity to try and turn China into a new india in the mid 19th century, but even everyone at the time took one look at how many loving people they'd have to rule and try to manage despotically and went "no thanks, one sepoy revolution was enough"

# ? Sep 9, 2022 15:02

stephenthinkpad: Jan 2, 2020

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAIOfxaM7JY&t=25s

# ? Sep 9, 2022 15:04

Cpt_Obvious: Jun 18, 2007

stephenthinkpad posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAIOfxaM7JY&t=25s

Someone get Luna an account already.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 15:48

my dad: Oct 17, 2012; this shall be humorous

Why would you want to inflict that on her?

# ? Sep 9, 2022 16:07

i say swears online: Mar 4, 2005

stephenthinkpad posted:

I think the British really got lucky with India, which was a golden goose. So the Brits built their later strategies around maintaining India (including the great game wars against Russia and wars in Afghanistan, expedition in Tibet) and also was looking for new colonies like India, but they never found a similar golden goose ever again.

So the British empire probably could have lasted longer and fallen in more peaceful fashion if they never colonized India.

it never could have happened politically but the brits probably could have lasted longer if they had attempted more integration a la brazil and portugal

# ? Sep 9, 2022 16:14

crepeface: Nov 5, 2004; r*p*f*c*

indigi posted:

very interesting, cause what do they think the differences are between eg Canada and the Philippines? in the English "success stories" barring Hong Kong (which isn't readily comparable to either) the natives are still subjugated and invisible from the national scene. do they think that's just a coincidence?

they identify with the white people that wiped out the natives (as a political force and national identity). australia is the same as canada.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 16:32

Tankbuster: Oct 1, 2021

The Raj lasted longer than most other eurocolonial projects. France started going big in africa later and had to decolonize at the same time.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 16:39

AnimeIsTrash: Jun 30, 2018

I think the british raj was cool

# ? Sep 9, 2022 16:39

DiscountDildos: Nov 8, 2017

https://twitter.com/deep_beige/status/1568260573552381957?s=20&t=zs6UxVrOgyW_7NBxQOhTnQ

It's all just a big show for Xi Dada

# ? Sep 9, 2022 16:45

Pener Kropoopkin: Jan 30, 2013; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS
(and can't post for 22 days!)

gradenko_2000 posted:

they're Filipinos, which is worse

there's a strong strain here of wishful thinking about how "if only it was Britain and not Spain, we could have been more like Australia or Canada"

or alternatively, "we should just become a US state", while thinking it means becoming like California or New York and not... like... Puerto Rico

Being a full state would be more like Hawaii, but that doesn't mean we'd want the Philippines to be a state either. A huge new state full of labor and resources in the western pacific sounds good on paper, but you're talking about a population that is non-white, primarily speaks Spanish & Tagalog, has active communist & muslim insurgencies, and is often fanatically Catholic. We wouldn't want it for our own political reasons, not even as a territory in the vein of Puerto Rico. One way or another the Philippines would require a colonial administration when our military empire is already overstretched as it is.

This kind of wishful thinking isn't just naive about being a member of the United States, it's ignorant of American interests and politics. Wishing for a kinder gentler colonial overlord who doesn't even want them.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 17:11

indigi: Jul 20, 2004; ^{how can we not talk about family

when family's all that we got?}

DiscountDildos posted:

https://twitter.com/deep_beige/status/1568260573552381957?s=20&t=zs6UxVrOgyW_7NBxQOhTnQ

It's all just a big show for Xi Dada

how the gently caress is the Chinese public's position "precarious," lockdowns are accompanied by nutritional and housing relief for individuals, not to mention the protection of their health. that's the opposite of precarious

# ? Sep 9, 2022 17:19

this allusion meant: Apr 9, 2006

indigi posted:

how the gently caress is the Chinese public's position "precarious," lockdowns are accompanied by nutritional and housing relief for individuals, not to mention the protection of their health. that's the opposite of precarious

sometimes local authorities gently caress up the supply deliveries. also people with specific medical needs aren�t always able to access either their meds or the hospital during lockdown. the western commentary is ridiculous because people want the lockdowns to be executed more competently, not to switch to an american style zero mitigation policy

# ? Sep 9, 2022 18:03

slave to my cravings: Mar 1, 2007; Got my mind on doritos and doritos on my mind.

famous competent western lockdowns

# ? Sep 9, 2022 18:04

i say swears online: Mar 4, 2005

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

This kind of wishful thinking isn't just naive about being a member of the United States, it's ignorant of American interests and politics. Wishing for a kinder gentler colonial overlord who doesn't even want them.

yes but it would be very funny to imagine what specific pandering D and R noms would do to win a state suddenly worth like 75 EVs

edit more like 110 EVs

# ? Sep 9, 2022 18:31

Pener Kropoopkin: Jan 30, 2013; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS
(and can't post for 22 days!)

i say swears online posted:

yes but it would be very funny to imagine what specific pandering D and R noms would do to win a state suddenly worth like 75 EVs

edit more like 110 EVs

There's at least more than one Republican operator who would let them crucify him if it meant being senator.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 19:08

Mans: Sep 14, 2011; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

DiscountDildos posted:

https://twitter.com/deep_beige/status/1568260573552381957?s=20&t=zs6UxVrOgyW_7NBxQOhTnQ

It's all just a big show for Xi Dada

There's great wisdom in the comments:
https://twitter.com/PraveenSimalwal/status/1568247093881630720

# ? Sep 9, 2022 19:15

Mantis42: Jul 26, 2010

i say swears online posted:

yes but it would be very funny to imagine what specific pandering D and R noms would do to win a state suddenly worth like 75 EVs

edit more like 110 EVs

Yea it wouldn't be like Puerto Rico, a significant portion of which prefers to exist in the worst-option status quo. Actually being a state confers a lot of economic benefits compared to being a territory, legal protections and a seat at the table of power politics. Personally I'd say it's a straight upgrade to be a state over being a neo colony. Make the Philippines America's creepily younger Filipina bride.

# ? Sep 9, 2022 20:32

mawarannahr: May 21, 2019

deep concern :qq:

quote:

North Korea�s Kim Jong Un says no to giving up nuclear weapons

The rubber-stamp parliament also passed a law allowing an �automatic nuclear strike� if the country is attacked.

North Korea�s leader Kim Jong Un has vowed never to surrender the country�s nuclear arsenal despite what he said were efforts by the U.S. to destabilize his government, as parliament passed a law greenlighting an �automatic nuclear strike� in response to the threat of attack, state media reported.

�The aim of the United States is not just to eliminate our nuclear weapons themselves but also ultimately to bring down our [leadership at] anytime by forcing [North Korea] to put down nuclear weapons and give up or weaken the power to exercise self-defense," the official Korea Central News Agency (KCNA) quoted Kim as saying in an address to the 7th Session of the 14th Supreme People's Assembly on Thursday in the capital Pyongyang.

Kim�s comments came as the country�s rubber-stamp legislature passed a law authorizing an �automatic and immediate� nuclear strike in the face of what the KCNA described as an imminent attack against North Korea�s leadership or �important strategic objects� within its territory.

KCNA published a report explaining the law, which defined five situations under which North Korea would use nuclear weapons, three of which pertain to nuclear or nonnuclear attacks or imminent attacks against the leadership or strategic military targets.

The other two conditions are more vague � in the event that it was �preventing the expansion and protraction of a war,� and in a situation that �causes a catastrophic crisis to the existence of the state.�

South Korea�s Yonhap News reported that the new law allows for an immediate nuclear attack on any provocation that threatens the command and control of Pyongyang�s nuclear forces.

The law essentially gives Kim �monolithic command,� and �all decisive power concerning nuclear weapons,� the report said.

Kim�s remarks and the new law are widely seen as a statement that Pyongyang refuses to negotiate with foreign powers over the denuclearization issue. But South Korea�s government said it would continue its strategy of restraining the nuclear threat and efforts to achieve denuclearization on the Korean peninsula through dialogue with the North.

"North Korea's continued nuclear weapons development will further strengthen the Seoul-Washington alliance, putting its own security at risk, and further isolating itself from the international community and worsening economic difficulties facing North Korean people," said an official of the South Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

South Korea�s ruling People Power Party criticized the new law as �a threat to South Korea and the international community.�

�The enactment of a nuclear force beyond the will to possess nuclear weapons is different from previous provocations, and it is very regrettable that it is a threat directly related to national security and people�s lives,� Park Jeong-ha, the party�s senior spokesperson said.

�North Korea is still misjudging the international situation, isolating itself and causing sanctions on itself,� he said, urging North Korea to denuclearize and expressing a firm willingness to respond to armed provocations.

Deep Concern

U.N. Secretary General Ant�nio Guterres expressed deep concern about the new law through his spokesperson St�phane Dujarric on Friday.

�The Secretary General has spoken often and recently about nuclear weapons. I think increasing the role of and significance of nuclear weapons and security doctrines is contrary to decades of efforts by the international community to reduce and eliminate nuclear risks,� said Dujarric.

�The Secretary General reiterates his call to the DPRK (Democratic People�s Republic of Korea) to resume dialogue with key parties concerned with a view to achieve sustainable peace and the complete and verifiable denuclearization of the nuclear Peninsula,� he said, using the official name for North Korea.

South Korea and the United States should not be intimidated by North Korea�s refusal to compromise on denuclearization, Alexander Vershbow, the former NATO deputy secretary general and former U.S. ambassador to South Korea, told RFA.

�Our two countries need to consult on what needs to be done to bolster the Alliance�s deterrence against nuclear coercion and ensure that Pyongyang is in no doubt that it will suffer devastating consequences if it uses its nuclear weapons,� Vershbow said.

�It will not be surprising if the DPRK statement fuels the ongoing debate within [South Korea] regarding acquisition of nuclear weapons of its own,� he said, adding that he believes the best strategy would be to focus on strengthening deterrence. �Our countries should continue to support denuclearization as the only basis for enduring peace on the Korean peninsula and normalization of relations with the DPRK.�

The new law does not change North Korea�s nuclear weapons policy drastically, because Pyongyang already declared itself a nuclear state in 2013 as a means to defend itself, Andrew Yeo, the Korean chair at the Washington-based Brookings Institution, told RFA.

"There are two significant implications about the 2022 doctrine. First, North Korea has institutionalized the idea that it will not give up nuclear weapons, signaling to the international community that denuclearization efforts are futile,� said Yeo.

�Second, North Korea seems to be showing more confidence and maturity in its role as a nuclear state based on the language in the preamble, and how it lays out its logic for the use of nuclear weapons - to deter war and defend North Korea sovereignty,� he said.

In reaction to North Korea�s message that �shuts the door� to denuclearization efforts, U.S. President Joe Biden and South Korean President Yoon Seok-youl will pursue more deterrence, Yeo said.

�For engagement to resume, Seoul and Washington may have to accept North Korea as a nuclear state first and move towards an arms control agreement. However, neither side seems prepared yet to move in that direction,� he said.

Pyongyang�s message to the world comes as no surprise, former U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Harry Harris, told RFA.

�The notion that North Korea would ever willingly give up its nuclear program is naive,� said Harris.

�Kim Jong Un has confirmed his intent. The U.S. and [South Korea] must continue to ensure the Alliance is prepared for any threat from the North,� he said, adding that Seoul should continue to rely on U.S. deterrence, rather than pursuing its own nuclear weapons program.

North Korea�s new approach to nuclear policy was �a step in the wrong direction,� Robert Gallucci, the former chief U.S. nuclear negotiator with North Korea, told RFA.

�Kim Jong Un�s statement does at least three things. First, it makes the chances of eventual engagement with the DPRK to improve relations and move the North to non-nuclear weapons status even more remote. Second, it clearly has the North embrace �first use� of nuclear weapons, making their deterrent value no longer their �sole purpose,�� he said.

�Third, it raises the question of the adequacy of the U.S. extended deterrent to meet the security needs of Tokyo and Seoul, and thus the possibility of nuclear proliferation in Northeast Asia.�

The White House and U.S. Department of State issued statements on Friday denying any hostile U.S. intent toward North Korea. The statements said Washington continues to seek a diplomatic solution to the situation on the Korean peninsula while remaining fully committed to defending South Korea.