Jabril

China has invested hundreds of billions into the global south and has demonstrably raised wages of probably billions of people in the process. I remember a paper from a few years ago that demonstrated it with China telecom expansion. China providing affordable phone and Internet access for people who otherwise didn't have it increased real wages for impoverished people.

I was just watching the China Report on breakthrough news and they cited an increase of Indonesia's state income from 3 billion to 32 billion in two years after China invested 30 billion in nickel processing facilities there.

These are just two examples of what I assume to be hundreds where China is taking the money they make and investing it around the world in a way that is mutually beneficial and improves the lives of people in ways that most people probably aren't aware of. Of course the relationship isn't totally equal, China is coming out with the better end of the deal in most cases, but we also have many examples of responsible state leadership from partner countries negotiating for better deals and getting them. Gyude Moore and Varoufakis have spoken about this at length.

So it isn't accurate to say China is winning while everyone else loses. China is certainly doing a lot of good around the world which has real impacts on average people; infrastructure, employment, healthcare, and more. They are sharing their wealth in a way that is building up the productive forces of the world

Yes, I think the moment to escalate came at a time when the conditions weren't as preferable as they would have liked, but the narrative being pushed and for the most part accepted by US citizens is what is stated in the paper.

The reality is that the plan isn't really turning out how they wanted because it relies entirely on getting lift from copium. They believe their own propaganda and ability to push it on a population who is consistently accepting of heinous atrocities being carried out in their name for generations.

They paint the deal as a good deal that the other side just wouldn't accept, even when those of us who keep up with things know this isn't the case, most citizens will eagerly agree that Iran screwed the pooch by not accepting the great deal from the best deal maker.

Since this is all a stage towards China, which has a rapidly closing window of engagement before the US is no longer a competitor, they had to pull the trigger now. They need to be done with Iran in the next 3 years if they are going to try to initiate conflict with China before 2030.

I watched Brian Berletic’s latest on Iran yesterday, I check in about once a month these days because he repeats the same things a lot. One thing he’s been talking about for a decade and which I haven’t seen mentioned here is the 2009 Brookings Institution analysis paper Which Path to Persia?, a pdf of which which can be downloaded for free from their website here

Brian goes over it in his videos on the subject, but it is definitely worth a look because it really does lay out the exact strategy the US has been following since 2009. Here's a link to his latest video that starts when he dives into the paper

here's a link to his 2012 article on this paper

Some quotes Brian touches on:

The most important point Brian drives home is this: Iran is one domino on the way towards China, and nothing is stopping the US from continuing down this path. Any talk of negotiations, not wanting war or escalation, etc is running cover for the next phase of US led, authorized, and planned escalation towards maintaining global hegemony.

waiting for Trump to say Israel has advanced space lasers that can see underground and that's why they are the only ones with this special intel

I haven't heard Trump say it yet but for some reason I'm assuming he goes for "KAY-TAR"

Plenty of those posters here too

And what's so bad about that?

The burger has come full circle

It gains you the ability to say "no one knows how bad Castro was as me, I was there" it's the yeonmi park role

RFK Jr is a poster here

at least a few

You are hyper fixating on me mentioning Deng in a way that isn't really relevant to what I was saying. I didn't anything about Deng prescribing what is happening now when he was in office. As I already responded, the pathway towards becoming tied into global capital started with him and has continued beyond what he may or may not have had in mind. The point is that this process and the principles around it by which China operates have been decades in the making, and expecting some radical shift from that is naive