I posted this in the dying hours of the last thread and I think it is funny enough to repost

What a contrast here

A few days ago a new Chinese built port was inaugurated by xi

In an opinion article in the El Peruano state newspaper, Xi said the Chancay project would generate $4.5 billion in annual revenues, create more than 8,000 direct jobs and reduce the logistics costs of the Peru-China route by 20%.

China's main motivation for developing the megaport, according to Ocharan, was access to neighboring Brazil, where a new railway line is planned to carry Brazilian exports such as soybeans and iron ore to the port.

The rail project is estimated to cost $3.5 billion, according to Mario de las Casas, corporate affairs manager at Cosco Shipping Chancay Peru.

And then this, Blinken announcing that the US is contributing to a new rail line in lima

Which is actually caltrain selling lima some 40 year old diesel train parts for $6m

Definitely a deal worthy of rocking in the free world

https://xcancel.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1858019192370507904

Wow, looks like Xi was extremely straightforward during his meeting with Biden, probably the most he's ever officially been in a meeting with a US president.

According to the Chinese readout (https://www.guancha.cn/internation/2024_11_17_755645.shtml) here's what he told Biden were the 7 "lessons of the past 4 years that need to be remembered":

1. "There must be correct strategic understanding. The 'Thucydides Trap' is not historical destiny, a 'new Cold War' cannot and should not be fought, containment of China is unwise, undesirable, and will not succeed."

2. "Words must be trustworthy and actions must be fruitful. A person cannot stand without credibility. China always follows through on its words, but if the U.S. side always says one thing and does another, it is very detrimental to America's image and damages mutual trust."

3. "Treat each other as equals. In exchanges between two major countries like China and the United States, neither side can reshape the other according to their own wishes, nor can they suppress the other based on so-called 'position of strength,' let alone deprive the other of legitimate development rights to maintain their own leading position."

4. "Red lines and bottom lines cannot be challenged. As two major countries, China and the United States inevitably have some contradictions and differences, but they cannot harm each other's core interests, let alone engage in conflict and confrontation. The One China principle and the three China-US joint communiqués are the political foundation of bilateral relations and must be strictly observed. Taiwan issue, democracy and human rights, development path, and development rights are China's four red lines, which cannot be challenged. These are the most important guardrails and safety nets for China-US relations."

5. "There should be more dialogue and cooperation. Under current circumstances, the common interests between China and the United States have not decreased but increased. Whether in areas of economy and trade, agriculture, drug control, law enforcement, public health, or in facing global challenges such as climate change and artificial intelligence, as well as international hotspot issues, China-US cooperation is needed. Both sides should extend the list of cooperation, make the cooperation cake bigger, and achieve win-win cooperation."

6. "Respond to people's expectations. The development of China-US relations should always focus on the wellbeing of both peoples and gather the strength of both peoples. Both sides should build bridges for personnel exchanges and cultural communication, and also remove interference and obstacles, not artificially create a 'chilling effect.'"

7. "Demonstrate great power responsibility. China and the United States should always consider the future and destiny of humanity, take responsibility for world peace, provide public goods for the world, and play a positive role in world unity, including engaging in positive interaction, avoiding mutual consumption, and not coercing other countries to take sides."

Funnily, all this is summarized in the official US readout (https://china.usembassy-china.org.cn/readout-of-president-joe-bidens-meeting-with-president-xi-jinping-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china-3/) with this short sentence: "The two leaders reviewed the bilateral relationship over the past four years". Talk about an understatement 😅. The language compared to the readout of the last Xi-Biden meeting in San Francisco one year ago is noticeably more forthright, especially on the U.S.'s lack of trustworthiness ("if the U.S. side always says one thing and does another..."). Looks like he's getting very frustrated with U.S. duplicity... The 4 red lines he enumerates are also new (not new individually as they've each been mentioned before, but packaging them together as "four red lines" and explicitly labeling them as such in a president-level diplomatic readout is new)

...

With the red lines on "Democracy and human rights" and "Development path/system", it looks like China is effectively telling the U.S. it will not humor them anymore in discussions about its internal system and so-called "human rights", and that it will consider any U.S. initiative aimed at interfering with China's internal affairs or otherwise shape China as hostile actions on the same level as Taiwan. This is also clear with Xi telling Biden that "neither side can reshape the other according to their own wishes".

On development rights Xi states that "the Chinese people's right to development cannot be deprived or ignored" and criticizes how "while all countries have national security needs, the concept shouldn't be overgeneralized or used as an excuse for malicious restrictions and suppression". He also said that "great power competition should not be the theme of the era; unity and cooperation are needed to overcome difficulties together. 'Decoupling and breaking chains" is not the solution; mutually beneficial cooperation is the path to common development. 'Small yards with high fences' is not befitting of great powers."

In other words, he's telling Biden that he believes the U.S. is attempting to curtail China's development in the guise of national security, but that this is "an excuse for malicious restrictions and suppression" and a red line as China has a fundamental right to develop as any other country. This is all, of course, also signaling to the upcoming Trump administration. The fact these are "red lines" means they're non-negotiable regardless of who leads the US: he's telling Trump too that attempts to "reshape" China or restrict its development will be viewed as hostile actions. And the emphasis on US "saying one thing and doing another" also puts the future administration on notice that China will judge the US by its actions rather than its diplomatic statements.

Conclusion: by framing these positions as "lessons learned" from the past four years, Xi is effectively closing the book on one approach to US-China relations - which he's obviously very critical about - and very clearly signaling to Trump a change is badly needed, particularly around the "4 red lines" and matching words with actions. The language is very confident, telling the U.S. they need to "treat each other as equals" and that they have no "position of strength" anymore. The US readout on this, as usual for the Biden administration, is very illustrative of exactly what Xi is complaining about: a complete disregard for China's stance on these issues and a refusal to engage with them, or even mention them at all. Not sure that "America first" Trump and the team of China hawks he put together will be much better...

https://allafrica.com/stories/202411180118.html

Looks good for the new president.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/18/bangladesh-ex-ministers-face-massacre-charges-hasina-probe-deadline-set

Bangladesh ex-ministers face ‘massacre’ charges, Hasina probe deadline set

This is a fucking kangaroo court, I do not think Hasina and her Government was great, but they are not in any way guilty of genocide.

“They are complicit in enabling massacres by participating in planning, inciting violence, ordering law enforcement officers to shoot on sight, and obstructing efforts to prevent a genocide.”

Yea i wonder what Yunus' military and police would do if a similar revolt takes place now. They continue with devaluing the term genocide.

https://www.axios.com/2024/11/17/biden-ukraine-russia-missiles-north-korea-response

1. Only ATACMS have been allowed for use.

2. They are only allowed for use in the Kursk region.

If this is the case, there won't be an escalation. This is entirely about preventing Russia from taking back the region before negotiations. The primary focus of Ukraine right now is to hold out until then.

Mapmaxxxing baby

Trump's FCC pick Brendan Carr posted this

https://xcancel.com/BrendanCarrFCC/status/1857419658812440927

leading to me desperately needing to post this:

fact chucking

restrictions on long range weaponsin Ukraine being lifted is something..

My prediction: trump is gonna continue status quo on arming Ukraine. When defeat is imminent, he will ask putin to wait to finish the job soon after trumps term ends

So the Dutch government coalition almost collapsed because of the Israeli hooligans? lmfao
Also first

Yooo we have the map back

I guess is sending Mirage 2000s now? I haven’t heard a single thing about F16s since that one crashed early on.

That's too bad, practically the only user in this thread who seemed cool has deleted. Honestly cannot blame them. If you don't get a sense of horror looking at people readying themselves for another four years of posting like this about American politics, you should. I tried blocking 80-plus people but it's still just so bad. I will take this as my cue to leave. Maybe I will be back when I finish writing about how fears of UFOs and mind control and other phantasms are used to control psychologically vulnerable people, how infiltrated nonviolent antifascist or social change orgs take advantage of the fear of informants to control their recruits' behavior, and how that kind of dovetails with the oblique denial of "conspiracy thinking" you see from much of the online left still.

I will be back with a doozy or not at all. If I am not back I have either decided to turn it into something better or died. Look around the corner. Don't reply to this.