Posted on 06/29/2022 7:20:39 AM PDT by SpeedyInTexas
Scorched earth with artillery near always works despite any quantum leap.....
“Russia can pretty much supply a big chunk of China’s oil imports...”
Once again, oil is not the only thing China is reliant on importing. You seem to have a talent for selectively ignoring facts that are inconvenient to your argument.
“Most of the smartphones sold in China are manufactured by Chinese companies like Xaomi, Oppo, Viva etc etc.”
I said nothing about who MANFUCTURED the phones. My comment was about who was BUYING the phones, and where they are getting the money to buy them. If you think the Chinese communist party-owned companies are going to support the Chinese middle class to continue to buy up all the Chinese products once Western money is withdrawn, you are mistaken.
“Fastest growing markets means they came late to the smartphone market and are racing to catch up.”
It also means they are less prosperous markets, because the more prosperous markets do not need to “catch up”. Products are sold to the most prosperous markets first because that’s where you make the most profit. Replacing sales to prosperous markets with sales to less prosperous markets is not an equivalent trade.
Yeah?
Actually America is racing to try and catch up with the Chinese in the EV market, where the Chinese are far ahead. Only thing is the Chinese are still moving very fast.
Chuckle.
They are getting the money from the huge Chinese owned smartphone, EVs. steel and other companies.
American owned phone companies like Apple make up only a small and decreasing percentage of workers and jobs in China.
Who said that?
I sure didn't.
You said:
‘Russia “doesn’t produce it at all”?
Since when?
Russia can pretty much supply a big chunk of China’s oil imports...’
So you quoted me talking about Russia not being able to supply all of China’s import needs because Russia does not produce all of the things China imports, but then your only counter contention is that Russia produces a lot of oil. Of course that statement ignores all of the other imports that China relies on.
Nope.
I quoted you saying Russia doesn't produce it all, meaning oil.
Never said anything about China's other imports.
“I quoted you saying Russia doesn’t produce it all, meaning oil.”
Except I was the one who said it, and I didn’t “mean oil”, as is abundantly clear from the full context of my statement:
“Crude’s only one of their imports. They can’t import all they need from Russia because Russia doesn’t produce it all.”
I never mentioned any Chinese imports from Russia part from oil in the entire thread.
Stop pushing a ridiculous agenda.
“I never mentioned any Chinese imports from Russia part from oil in the entire thread.”
Exactly. You selectively ignored every part of my argument except the part about “crude oil” and then try to pretend you have actually answered my argument, when you didn’t.
...raining down in Eastern Europe AND threatening to nuke America.
_________
Any source on targets other than Ukraine?
I heard the Russian MOD (don’t recall the Russian form of the title) say any munitions would be “aimed at the places of decision.”
Arguably, that’s DC, so many Americans are now calculating the odds.
Could be the residents of Virginia & Maryland who work for/as lobbyists, or are otherwise employed by the government are beginning to think about relocation.
NATO is not going to back down. Everyone is in line for a nose in the trough.
“half of America still doesn’t want to react when Russian tanks and missiles are raining down in Eastern Europe AND threatening to nuke America.”
Not sure what you’re getting at, old bean. Would most people here want the USA to put boots on the ground even if Russian tanks rolled into Poland or Lithuania? Course not.
Did anybody change their tune in April after Russian TV ramped up the talk about nuking the USA?
Threats to attack America were debated on Rossyia 1 several weeks ago. The best place to grab the footage is #JuliaDavisNews (The Daily Beast’s resident Russian telly addict) on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1517007534128775168
Julia Davis’ channel is really worth keeping an eye on. Some of the stuff from Russian TV comes from a show with two presenting regulars also in the State Duma, with the station adhering to an editorial briefing from the Kremlin.
Until they realised people were recording their shows and putting entire segments of it up on social media they were very unguarded about committing genocide, forced relocations, forced re-education, collective punishment, starting a nuclear war, and even had a half hour session digging into the Putin/Lukashenko maps of the coming invasion of the Baltic states.
2nd March: four Russian warplanes (two SU 27s and two SU 24s) with two of them apparently carrying nuclear arms, violated Swedish airspace over the Baltic Sea, east of Gotland.
Mere days earlier: Russian TV pundits were walking the Russian audience through a map of nuclear-backed invasions of islands in the Baltic, including Gotland.
It’s a bloody good psyops tactic, I’ll give them that. Say something completely outlandish, and within 48 hours do something that makes that outlandish discussion suddenly look very plausible.
Discussion on the invasion of Lithuania and squaring up to take on all of NATO:
https://twitter.com/i/status/1541178759654653960
Russia is very easily triggered by the mere suggestion of a NATO expansion eastward. But Russia must know that past NATO expansion has never actually resulted in any military threat - real or implied - being made against Russia. All Russia has to do to avoid ANY such threat ever being levelled at it, is DON’T EVEN JOKE ABOUT INVADING ITS BALTIC NEIGHBORS.
Baltic states can see what happened to Ukraine, and they can watch a TV station where the Duma guests and presenters are practically gushing with enthusiasm for Baltic invasions... and the Baltics are supposed to NOT be triggered by that because that’d offend Russia. Go figure.
Look up US defense spending as a percentage of GDP in the 1950s and compare it to today, comsymp
What was our national debt in the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, today? and have you compared defense spending then to now adjusting it to the % of our overall debt? We went from a surplus to a deficit and today we're $30 trillion in debt while still spending like drunkin' sailors.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.