North Korea disrespected China is an oxymoron

The idea that because you haven't heard anything about China reining in N.K. since a month that ended about 5-6 days ago that it somehow means anything at all in terms of international diplomacy is ******n moronic. Life isn't a derivative of the televised news cycle. See my original post:

China has a lower GDP per capita than Iraq. Their military spending is less than a third of the United States, and their military hasn't participated in actual combat in decades. Their influence in the Pacific is so tenuous the Obama administration managed to get almost every single neighbor to sign onto a trade deal that excludes them. "Japan and Taiwan" being concerned is rather irrelevant when their concern just translates into their own military buildup. Yes, Trump is attempting to embarrass China. All you're succeeding in doing is embarrassing yourself while proving you know nothing about the geopolitics of the Asia Pacific outside of whatever you hear blathered on FOX.

Withdrawing from the Paris accord has next to no positive impact on the Chinese economic situation. The Chinese are the ones choking on their air- we've long had stricter pollution controls on our domestic industries. TPP was never ratified to begin with, Trump simply ended the process it was crawling through with no discernible finish date. China is notoriously insecure by in large because they spent a century under the boot of foreign powers and feel like they haven't yet been accepted by other world powers as an equal.

Solar and wind power hasn't yet developed past a point where it's anything but a costly money-sink, and they're aggressively pursuing it because they've had one of the most successful grass-roots protest movements since Tiananmen Square over their horrible air quality and pollution levels.

Not sure what this speculative piece over a potential marginal increase in China's position has to do with the overall argument.
What does any of this have to do with your argument that Trump is failing to make China look bad for failing to keep North Korea in line like they said they would?

I don't think you have any ******n idea what you're talking about outside of what cable news feeds you, or whatever you happen to find with quick google searches. You're about as bad as Trump is on a fundamental level, and that's what makes your critiques of him so pathetic. You just seem to have knee-jerk reactions to anything he does, even at a completely cost-free public diplomatic move that could actually pay off, and just come up with bad points to support your disagreement as you go.

 

I went off on a tangent. You are right. We are talking about Kim and China. We will never agree on Trump, so we should return to the subject at hand.

One thing is very strange. I keep looking for more information about China's relationship to N.K. The latest information is from the first part of April. The problem is ongoing, but there are no updates. There are updates from Trump and his advisors and a U.N. article, but nothing about China reining in N.K.

The inference is clear. There is no information on China reining in N.K.

 

But to suggest that things aren't going on behind the scenes between two quite closed governments both of whom with a vested interest in keeping things on the QT is probably stretching it a bit.

 

Then they should say nothing, although I know that is hard for Trump. But he and his advisors keep telling us China is reining in N.K. sans details. They look awfully foolish when they do that.

Here is the thing. China has been N.K.'s ally for 72 years. 67 years ago China launched a major attack on American forces in support of N.K. They have been close allies ever since. Today, there is absolutely nothing to base a supposition that China is helping the U.S. by restricting her long time ally.

It amazes me that Trump is saying such a thing. But that's our President. He also insists that Russia will help us with ISIS. There is no basis for that conjecture, either.

Why does Trump try to make friends out of our enemies and make enemies out of our friends?

You don't have to answer that question.

 

The last bit of information on China's relationship with N.K. was during the first half of April. That is over a month and a half ago, not 5-6 days.

Prove that statement concerning Obama's deals. In any case, if we are to believe Trump, he is trashing all trade deals and starting over with new negotiations. Dismissing the fears of our allies -- Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan -- from Chinese expansion, militarily and economically, is not very wise. Those fears are very real and the U.S. should pay attention.

I am accepting the guidance of the experts over you, because much of what you are saying comes from your imagination. I have documented my views. "China is cementing its global dominance of renewable energy and supporting technologies, aggressively investing in them both at home and around the globe, leaving countries including the US, UK and Australia at risk of missing the growing market."

That's what the experts are saying. You don't have any experts.

The Economist reports. "ALMOST 150 years after photovoltaic cells and wind turbines were invented, they still generate only 7% of the world’s electricity. Yet something remarkable is happening. From being peripheral to the energy system just over a decade ago, they are now growing faster than any other energy source and their falling costs are making them competitive with fossil fuels. BP, an oil firm, expects renewables to account for half of the growth in global energy supply over the next 20 years. It is no longer far-fetched to think that the world is entering an era of clean, unlimited and cheap power. About time, too."

It had to do with your foolish comment that China is insecure.

More on the TPP. Based upon sound estimates from the two most respected economic analyses of TPP -- the Petri-Plummer study from the Peterson Institute in Washington, DC, and the US International Trade Commission study -- the vast bulk of workers, businesses, and consumers in the US will lose out due to the withdrawal from the TPP.

Again, I bow to the opinion of exerts rather than yours.

A sure sign of weakness and insecurity is when a poster lowers himself to the level where he thinks he needs to use personal insults to make a point. Why in the world do you think researching your topic and providing substantiation for one's opinions is a bad thing?

Again, I beg to differ. I think researching the subject one is writing about is better than shooting your mouth off.

 

They look foolish only to people with a vested interest in believing them foolish. For instance it could as well just mean that he is giving China a bit of a nudge. Or a host of other things.

 

There are two main reason for the take off in Solar and wind, they are heavily subsidized and China is leading because the manufacturing process for Solar panels is extremely dirty and China's anti pollution ordinances are very weak, this makes manufacturers outside of China extremely non competitive.

 

His tenure was during the majority of the development of the TPP, no?

Non-sequitur to the current argument.

How does anything you just cited contradict the claims you are responding to?
The amount of "could" "might", and "risk" in this article is incredible.

News magazines have been writing buzz-word filled articles about the coming green energy revolution since I was a freshman in high school. Yes, China is heavily subsidizing solar cells. That doesn't make them sustainable- it makes solar cells cheaper. If China, which has low pollution controls, produces X amount of CO2 to create cheap solar cells then it doesn't matter how many Westerners stick those solar cells on their roofs- it will still be a net negative. Solar power still has a hell of a long way to go to become truly competitive without being subsidized out the ass- and the actual "dirty little secret" of the entire situation is that the less people consume fossil fuels, the cheaper they will get.

The "experts" you seem to rely on are pundits and journalists.
How does potentially withdrawing from the TPP or cheap solar cells have anything to do with whether China is insecure?
You're throwing random articles about potential economic harm to US workers and markets. None of that has anything to do with my points-
which were about the fact we were able to encircle China in the Pacific economically in the first place.

When your opponent appears to lack the basic logical frameworks necessary to be engaged with and defers to the manufactured theater of 24-hour news, there's little left to do but point out their behavior and mock it.

"I think researching the subject one is writing about is better than shooting your mouth off"
You cited clips off FOX as evidence in a geopolitical argument.
Your standards for what constitutes "research" are a joke.

 

I'm sorry, I'm guessing you are more in tune with a President like Trump than I am, although there has never been a President like Trump. I can even vaguely remember President Truman. I have very real memories of Eisenhower. I have a degree in history, and I taught high school history. So, what I don't remember, I have learned by studying our history.

I am used to Presidents saying what is true, not what they hope to be true. Sure, you and I can both bring up Presidential statements that turned out to be untrue, but I am talking in a general sense. In general, Presidents don't lie to Americans.

Trump is either lying about China reining in N.K. or speaking from complete ignorance. He has been saying it ever since Xi visited him at Mar-a-Lago on April 5th. That's two months. And in those two months there has not been a shred of evidence that China is reining in N.K. The coal embargo was a ruse and trade between China and N.K. has increased 37%.

In view of all this, what are we supposed to believe when Trump and advisors say China is helping us with N.K. In addition to everything else, considering historical relationships, what Trump is saying makes no sense.

If Trump is thinking he can nudge China in her area of the world to restrict an ally of 72 years, that makes absolutely no sense, either. He must speak from a position of strength, not fantasy and wishful thinking, when dealing with China.

Or Russia, for that matter.

 

You need to pay closer attention.

The Economist reports. "ALMOST 150 years after photovoltaic cells and wind turbines were invented, they still generate only 7% of the world’s electricity. Yet something remarkable is happening. From being peripheral to the energy system just over a decade ago, they are now growing faster than any other energy source and their falling costs are making them competitive with fossil fuels. BP, an oil firm, expects renewables to account for half of the growth in global energy supply over the next 20 years. It is no longer far-fetched to think that the world is entering an era of clean, unlimited and cheap power. About time, too."

I used the Petri-Plummer study from the Peterson Institute in Washington, DC, and the US International Trade Commission study. Peter A. Petri is the Carl J. Shapiro Professor of International Finance at the Brandeis International Business School (IBS), senior fellow of the East-West Center and visiting fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. He was founding dean of IBS at Brandeis, and has held visiting appointments at various universities as well as at the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Michael G. Plummer is director, SAIS Europe, and Eni Professor of International Economics at Johns Hopkins University, as well as senior fellow of the East-West Center. He was head of the Development Division of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and an associate professor of economics at Brandeis University. He has been a consultant to a
number of international organizations, development banks, and governments in the Asia-Pacific region and the European Union.

That is the only source you can remember I used? That's funny, it really is.

 

It is also possible that since he recently met at length with Xi that he knows something you and I don't. In fact I'd just about bet on It.

 

I seriously doubt it. Silence is not one of Trump's virtues. I think you are dreaming. Believe me, if he had any good news to tell us -- like how China is helping us with the N.K. problem -- he would be telling us.

I think the more logical explanation, the one that fits the historical perspective -- is there isn't any good news for us.

BTW, my idea seems to be working. Trump and his people have become far less belligerent lately. Kim has gone relatively quiet, too. Let's hope it stays that way. Sending two strike groups to the waters off Korea while threatening a "major, major conflict" was just plain stupid. Trump tried to sound tough for the cameras and it backfired, scaring the hell out of everybody.

 

I think you believe anything to keep your narrative going however holey it is.

 

Yeah, I read that and responded to it. If you can't connect the dots well enough to follow a basic argument then we can just stop, talking to you is getting repetitive and boring.

You used studies to justify points that were irrelevant to the current argument, congratulations. Economic impacts of the TPP on the United States aren't relevant to the geopolitical position it indicated China was in.

When did I say it was the only source you used?