What really pisses me off is that she’s focusing on the dying part. Yeah, sure, it’s trivially obvious that we’re all going to die. But there’s also quality of life issues at stake. Yes, many people will die earlier than necessary because of these cuts, but there will be many, many more suffering some degree of decrease in quality of life, short of death, because of these cuts. Diabetic patients losing limbs because they can’t afford enough insulin. People suffering chronic pain because they can’t get the surgery needed to fix an underlying problem. Stuff like that. The list goes on, and on, and on. They’ll all suffer, for a long time before they die.
We need a contest: Write the most obviously anti-Trump version of such an essay, but written in such a way that the usual MAGA idiots who can’t understand subtext will think it’s a pro-Trump essay.
It’s not just what they say but how they say it. Smirking and derisive, they have nothing but contempt for the people they are supposed to represent. She even throws in a “Christian” bit at the end. Does she really think her god thought that was funny? The press secretary is especially prone to this scornful behavior. But they do know how to make daddy happy. It’s reprehensible.
And, as expected, US demands Australia lifts defence spending by $40b a year ‘as soon as possible’ because “Australia must do more to support the US in the Indo-Pacific”. After all it’s you damn merkins who are ramping up the tension in the Pacific theatre.
Which presumably will comprise substantial purchases US military hardware and has nowt to do with Boeing losing billion dollar contracts and li’l ol’ Oz picking up some nice exports to PRC of ag produce into PRC which the US lost.
That’s not even a dog whistle. It’s a bloody loud foghorn. It’s purpose is to let you know that you simply do not count as American if you are not Christian, her version of Christian that is. And, of course, it matters not, therefore, if you die, even if you die today.
How do they rehearse a siege? Haven’t the (real) good military people (esp. retired) concluded this would be the most effective way (at least at first) to take Taiwan.
Same article:
The US demand comes as President Donald Trump says he will increase economic punishments on Australia by doubling the tariffs on steel and aluminium, which the prime minister has described as “inappropriate” and “economic self-harm”.
So up to Australia I guess is whether they allow the USA 7th Navy to dock in Brisbane and Sydney.
“But Mr Hegseth warned Australia must lift spending faster with a “real and potentially imminent” threat from China.”
Oh, c’mon. That’s why I said “(real) good military people” above about Taiwan.
The most effective way for China to retake Taiwan is by simply waiting until the US debt crisis becomes acute and offering to swap their holdings of Treasuries for Taiwan.
An attack on Taiwan would be the worst thing the PRC’s government could do to the mainland’s economy. There is far too much cross-strait economic activity, especially with investment from Taiwan in the mainland. The saber rattling is more for domestic consumption than for a sustained military objective.
The mainland is not going to take Taiwan and Taiwan’s government is never going to be in charge of a re-united China. The only way the latter would happen is if the one-party state on the mainland collapses akin to the collapse of East Germany and that of the Soviet Union. And that’s not going to happen either.
I will just tell you what I told everyone who would listen prior to 1989: East Germany is going to collapse. I don’t know when, but when it starts, it will be quick.
Same for mainland China. And the USA. It may take many decades, but collapse they will. And it will be quick. And probably not as neat and peaceful as Eastern Germany was.
@Monty, thanks. From your comments, I get the feeling that both China and Taiwan are, for now, satisfied with the status quo, no matter how political they are. They’ve reached an equilibrium, that neither likes, but that works for both.
The DDR had plenty of problems prior to 1989. If anything, it’s a miracle they lasted as long as they did, even with Soviet assistance. With the removal of that support, the collapse became pretty evident. West Germany’s government’s investments did not provide any real economic benefit to West Germany; it was to remove emigration pressures (and, yes, there was actually emigration, but not much, from East Germany). Taiwan’s investment provides an economic benefit to both mainland China and Taiwan.
The impending collapse of the United States is a fantasy. As much as I despise the current administration, our system actually is working to hold it back from doing the damage it wants to do, damage that actually would bring on a collapse. And by our system, I mean both our functioning federal vs state division of power, and our decentralized law enforcement, along with a military which is not the tool of an absolute monarch.
I’d say you’re mostly correct, depeding on what you include in the status quo. The mainland government gets irritated when any Taiwan government official makes noise about an indepedent Taiwan. The status quo which the mainland wants and likes is a pragmatic working relationship but without any pushback from Taiwan’s government. The economic issue is the most important one, in reality, for that pragmatic working relationship.
Maybe both sides see this as more of a hydra than a dragon or snake. The hydra was an unpleasant thing to begin with, and when one cut off one of its heads, it grew multiple replacements, presumably making the thing even more unpleasant.
Time will tell. You say yourself that the current clusterfuck is working towards the collapse, I hope for the sake of the world and of sanity that you are right when you write the system will hold back the madness. I am not sure they can succeed forever, but you are closer to the ground.
Just for the record: When I told anyone back in the '80s that the GDR was going to collapse, 99% replied that that could never happen. But having been right once does not mean I will ever be right again, of course.
I thought Taiwan was important to the Chinese in general for almost religious-type reasons and that Xi, who has not claimed President for life as Putin has (and Fatass can in 3 years), was really keen on being in charge (and getting praise and credit) at the time of re-annexing Taiwan.
Invasion like a Normandy landing would be very costly in terms of soldiers and materiel. As would any indiscriminate pre-flattening of whatever might be considered important to take out (Perhaps electric grids).
Yet a siege of an island that in no way is self-independent on food and fuel and other resources might take a month or some longer yet definitely-finite time would be effective till they capitulate. So long as the 7th Navy (or Vicious Pete Hegseth) doesn’t tell them to “quit it” and if need be, back those words with actions.