placnx

16 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Oh, you would like to see China getting a kicking ?  What do you suggest ?  Military action against them ? Do you reckon missiles and bombs ?

Yes, okay, you reckon that because of what China has already done, the US should actually go ahead with a military strike ? I really do hope that war never takes place between America and China.

The scary thing is, I think about a third of all people have the same opinion as you. 

The question is whether China might eventually annoy enough countries that a reset would be declared on UN and WTO, goodbye China. Rather far-fetched at this point, but what will Xi do next?

5 hours ago, 2530Ubon said:

Your post isn't correct.

 

1) Daszack was never the lab manager. He works (present tense - He is the president of EcoHealth Alliances) for a non-profit that provides funding to different projects. He is also on the ground now as a member of the W.H.O team in China. He has NEVER worked at the W.I.V (Wuhan Institute of Virology)

 

2) The lab has operated since 1956 and has been working on MERS/SARS since 2003

 

3) Funding came from Eco Health alliances - a global non profit. This non-profit received funds from the government and the non-profit provided funding.

I would suggest that you, everybody, read the following.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html

Then we can have an informed discussion. Daszak was the conduit for funds from NIH, but he also got them a crucial technology from the US.  

5 hours ago, Russell17au said:

Very interesting comments about this American run lab in Wuhan where Dr Peter Daszack an Englishman was the lab manager and he worked for a company called Ecohealth Alliances Inc whose offices are located in New York. Batwoman was employed at that lab and it has operated since 2014 to do research after the MERS and SARS viruses. This lab was funded by America since the Obama Administration in 2014. The research was not only done in China but it was also done in Australia and France. Here is the website of American National Institute of Health showing in its projects about this lab and the people who worked in it and the work that was carried out. 

Project Information - NIH RePORTER - NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results

https://projectreporter.nih.gov/project_info_results.cfm?aid=8674931&icde=49588715

The following is the most thorough investigation and analysis of evidence of the escape theory that I've encountered:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html

5 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

And I totally agree with "It is not about  Authoritarian Vs Democracy  or communism Vs Capitalism. "
I reckon it's more about "America using the issue of Taiwan as an excuse to declare war on China, just in case if America does want to fight China" .   ????
See, that vast trade deficit that America has got with China. Them billions of US government bonds that China has got. How can America clear these bonds held by China ? Well, defeat China in a war, that will do it. 

These are conspiracy theories. Where did you find them?

7 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

The 2047 pledge was actually part of President Xi Jinping's speech but stepped short of issuing a firm deadline. It is meant more as a carrot and stick offering to Taiwan. In his speech he offered Taiwan a peaceful unification under a One-China-two-systems policy. No doubt Taiwan take this offer with much apprehension after what happened in Hong Kong. Whether the future Presidents may have their own policy dealing with the Taiwan issue. 

 

The Taiwanese politics and their citizens will have a big role on the eventualities of the issue. Pro China and pro independence political parties have been occupying the seat of the government for last 70 years. Opinion polls showed that only a small minority of Taiwanese support pursuing one or the other at the moment with most preferring to stick with the current middle ground. Seem practical as Taiwan's economy is heavily dependent on China. Taiwanese have invested almost 60 B in China and has up to 1 million of their people working in China, most running their own factories. Similarly, this economic factor may just be the deterrent to any military action because of the cost to China's economy. 

 

IMHO I think both sides will continue with the current status quo. At the end of the day, if the Taiwan continue to prosper and the middle class keep growing and Taiwan maintain their very low percentage of citizens living below poverty line, politics will cancel out their pursuit of independence. But all in the future and we both are not fortune tellers. 

Yes, the Taiwanese want to maintain the status quo, but what has been changing is that the party which has inherited the KMT mantle has been forced by events in Hong Kong to distance itself from the concept of eventual unification. So now they are solidly in the middle position - status quo. Is that just for appearances? 

On 2/1/2021 at 5:05 PM, tonbridgebrit said:

 The United Nations ?   The UN Security Council ? ????

You're forgetting that China is one of the Big Five in the UN.  USA, Britain, France, Russia and China are the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, and each one has the vital importance of the 'power of veto'.

And by the way, why is it that them five are in that powerful position ? Well, after World War Two, the League of Nations was converted to being the United Nations. And basically, the winners of World War Two chose to give themselves the special status of being permanent members of the security council, and having 'power of veto' over whatever issues.
A country having power of veto, means that country is allowed to play their 'power of veto' card, and it blocks whatever proposal.

And so, seeing as Peoples' Republic of China is one of the Big Five, well, the UN are not going to do much against China.   ????

Some countries want to reform the Security Council. The absolute power of veto was a tragic planning mistake in 1945. The UN has been so often undermined by this at critical moments. The UN would be out of the picture in a China/Taiwan conflict.

On 2/1/2021 at 11:11 AM, Eric Loh said:

US is unlikely to involve in a war between Taiwan and China as it would cause catastrophic harm to the country and may not even ensure they can help Taiwan win. The general public will again asked why Washington would defend an island thousands of miles away with seemingly high human and economic costs. Deja vu? A recent poll taken as early as in October revealed only 35% of Americans would support US military action if the island was attacked. Washington will continue with their strategic ambiguity in their Taiwan Relation Act (1979) which has no promises of military intervention. Trump adminstration made a lot of threats but remained to be ambigious without any direct change to the agreement. NATO has enough problems with Russia to be concerned and binded by their constitution on military aid to only NATO ally.

 

China too will not want a war with Taiwan and condemnation from the world. War with Taiwan will be costly in terms of casualties and economic for both countries and will be an extremely unpopular war of the same race. IMO, both countries will try to avoid war although we can accept some sabre rattling and skirmishes. Both countries have prospered  to a high living standard in last 70 days in the current defacto form. Both will not wish to risk destroying that status quo. 

You are right that most people in Taiwan and China would like to maintain the status quo, though people in Taiwan certainly don't like the way China under Xi is changing, becoming more and more belligerent.

As for Americans, most probably don't know the difference between Taiwan and Thailand, so if they are asked questions about defending Taiwan, the answer would be "no". As China has gotten a very negative image after Covid, more Americans will eventually become aware of the current China/Taiwan situation, and various implications. Any aggression on Taiwan would likely provoke a stronger popular reaction than recent events in Hong Kong, as Americans no doubt thought Britain should take the lead on reacting to China's move on HK.

The US can continue to provide defensive weapons without changing formal policy, but as China keeps upgrading offensive weapons it's logical that the US will provide a more potent defense. Obviously, at some point these defensive weapons could have a first strike capability, but it's China's choice to keep upping the ante. 

20 hours ago, tomazbodner said:

Any particular literature they were more interested in than another?

They really liked my books on traditional Japanese architecture (probably the paper was from Japan).

20 hours ago, lopburi3 said:

They can eat through cement - very nasty things.  Is there any wood in your home (used to use for floor support and roofbeams as well as doorways and decretive).  Have only seen/had spray treatment (and drill holes in ground floor to get under house).  This is the normal pest control function here as they can make sawdust of wood very quickly.  And if you find a nest do not put your hand in it!!!  Our treatment man quite to become a monk due to his previous life of killing of termites, so that is another factor.  

 

 

The came through the cement slab on ground floor and ate a huge hole in my wool carpet, so yes, they can get through cement. In another room, somehow they came through a cement wall, perhaps via an electrical pipe, and ate 30 large format books. They seem to prefer glossy paper! They also nibbled the paper frames of slides. 

18 hours ago, kingdong said:

"starve" ? how do,es the global economy equate to food production.?

Most of the world imports food from somewhere. If crops fail in Brazil, China may not have enough food for the pigs.

14 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

So you believe USA should have ignored nation with 1 billion people, nuclear weapons and which was fundamental to any possibility of the USA extricating itself from the mess of Vietnam war, and for keeping North Korea from staring a war?  Easy to criticize50 years later, but the USA made the right move for world peace.

 

I do not support China, but I can see that the response must be worldwide with all nations sharing common voice. Russia borders with China and they have as much concern as USA and EU, but they stay quiet because USA and EU is an enemy. Time to make peace with Russia like was done for WWII. Russia makes friends with China on same basis it made Molotov and Von Ribbentrop agreement that allowed tragedy of grab on Poland and Finland. Now we ask Australia to take on China alone. Look at what  China does to Australia because no one helps Australia. Many of the civil disturbances we see now are stirred up by a foreign force through disinformation and funding for "social justice" (which is not, but  acts as cover for protests).Why would any small country in Asia stand up to China after it sees how Australia is abandoned.

The Nixon/Kissinger gambit was motivated by the coming US election, to of course create a narrative that this would get China on the US side, so to make N Vietnam agree to terms more favorable to Nixon's image! I doubt that America at the time felt any threat from a nuclear China.

Today, assuming that China is still under CCP control, it would be in no position to bully anybody, especially Australia, since AU would not be exporting much to China. The world would be such a better place without an overbearing China.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, there should have been a Marshall Plan to support the embryonic democratic forces. Instead the Russian economy was made worse by some economists from the US who wanted to privatize their SOEs. Russia could have been a solid partner of the West.

We should remember history to learn from it, so as not to get ever deeper into a policy gone terribly wrong. 

14 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

You do not understand Taiwan "democracy". Taiwan local elections have similarities to the old municipal politics Chicago, Palermo, Naples, New York from 50 years ago.  Yes, Taiwan has a form of parliamentary democracy and they make much progress every year. However, you have a bias that promotes Taiwan virtues and sadly they have many weaknesses. You ignore the fact that a large part of population is motivated only by personal profit; if they can make money, they want reunification with mainland. If there was so much dislike of mainland, why is Taiwan a big investor?

I wonder how much new investment is going from Taiwan to China these days. Like many people, there was wishful thinking that China would become increasingly democratic. Instead there's been a reversion to the norm, i.e. authoritarianism. Taiwanese investors were also investing there to supply factories servicing Apple and other deluded Western companies, such as Apple.

17 hours ago, Gulfsailor said:

The future technology is EUV lithography, whose market is completely dominated by ASML, a Dutch company. They’d happily sell to anyone...

You may not be aware that a lot of chip making technology is licensed from America, so that Dutch ASML may be prohibited from selling to certain Chinese customers, especially those affiliated with the military. 

It's also a problem with surveillance technology, robotics, many things, but I think that attitudes are changing in Europe. Germany now scrutinizes private tech deals with China.

17 hours ago, rabas said:

 

You are right and make a good point. However, it's more complicated. Taiwan is only a global resource for IC manufacture, they run factories. If you want to make a SotA IC today, you must first buy billions of dollars of the most sophisticated technology on Earth, just for one factory. This mostly comes from US/Japan/Europe and the US is still on top.

 

If China ever took over Taiwan, IC manufacturing would collapse because It can't survive without a constant supply of high tech machines and support from manufacturers who maintain them. I doubt anyone would help China get it up and running. The world's machines would just go to new factories elsewhere. 

 

The problem is that the West is unprepared for a sudden move by China to control the chip industry. For its own good, Taiwan should put new fabrication facilities somewhere out of reach of China so that the West could not be blackmailed into acceding to the takeover of Taiwan. If the Taiwanese had time, they could blow up existing factories before Xi takes his triumphal tour. They should have a Stuxnet pre-installed to clean up the software at their Chinese facilities as well.

17 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

You should look at history.  China and Taiwan were in the same country prior to the 1890s. Japan took Taiwan in the 1890s.
Prior to 1945, China's name was Republic of China. Between 1945 and 1949, China and Taiwan were both in Republic of China. After 1949, China became Peoples' Republic of China. Taiwan carried on being Republic of China.

There can only be one China, there will never be two Chinas. USA recognizes that. USA recognised Taiwan as China prior to the 1970s. USA recognised China as China after the early 70s. And indeed, the United Nations don't recognize Taiwan as a country, hence Taiwan hasn't got a seat at the UN.

I blame opportunist Richard Nixon and his sidekick Henry K for this. It didn't have to be.

17 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

So NATO is getting involved ?  Not because a load of Chinese in Republic of China (Taiwan) want independence. It's because the island of Taiwan is of 'strategic value' ?

Well, it's certainly import to some of us that Taiwan shows how democracy can operate well in a Chinese cultural environment, something that's an anathema to some. However, others are quite concerned that the most important chip fabricators are situated in Taiwan, and if China suddenly possessed that it would be dangerous for everybody else. Even the Russians might not like it!

1 hour ago, mrfill said:

Assuming their game is being terrible at geography.

 

NATO is the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and unless Taiwan plans on moving soon, is rather a long way off the North Atlantic.

NATO seems to be involved in Afghanistan. Taiwan is of much greater strategic value to the North Atlantic alliance.

7 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

I can see that the bitter and sad history of China attempt at unification is not your strong suit. I suggest you start with the Qin dynasty and work yourself to Mao's unification. Status quo has served Taiwan well for last 70 years. Don't need US or the rest of the free world to made things worse with no intention of intervening. 

There was not much problem until Xi started overdosing the Chinese people with a chauvinistic nationalism. Now there are expectations.

8 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Contemporary China is no longer the whipping boy like in the past. They are stronger in military and economic power. However China is still weary of the current global balance of power in favour of US but will never waver on the Taiwan's constitution to remain with the One-China principle. Wars will be costly for all sides but I personally doubt that US will defend Taiwan with troops on the ground. They don't even have a defense treaty for direct military intervention. Current Taiwan Relation Act only provide assistance to enable Taiwan maintain a sufficient self-defense capabilities. The West has no appetite for foreign wars taking the example of Ukraine.

 

Taiwan will be better in the foreseeable future to maintain the staus quo which is actually a defecto independence. In a survey by the Election Study Center, 90% of Taiwanese favour status quo. Not many want a unification with China. 

Taiwan has significant strategic importance to the West, not just the US. Ukraine is unimportant in comparison. Xi Jin Ping has however vowed to take over Taiwan. Will the others in the Chinese leadership blink?

3 hours ago, damascase said:

Talking about shameful: does that apply too when a manufacturer unilaterally decides to deliver to the EU only a quarter of the agreed quantity?

I'd like to see a copy of the contract. "Force majeure" is French.

11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Wow.

Thailand is really getting the short end of the stick on this one.

The vaccine nationalism going on is truly tragic as without timely global vaccinations, the world won't be on a path of recovery. 

The EU should have ordered early. Besides, all major economies should be greatly increasing production capacity, by public rather than just private companies, so that when local needs are filled production can supply the vast need of the Third World. After that, hopefully they have equipment and facilities that can be used for other vaccines and medicines in short supply. These facilities would stand ready to fight the next pandemic, hopefully to mass vaccinate people before the pandemic arrives on their shores.

13 hours ago, ctxa said:

I suppose you will have to have the vaccination certificates certified by your local government. And then take that certification to the Thai embassy in your country for an extra certification and stamping by the Thai embassy. 

 

That should be pretty counterfeit-proof. 

 

How about every other country that you are visiting?

14 hours ago, Jumbo1968 said:

The NHS in the U.K. have a data base but I am sure they would be willing to provide any data to another country due to data protection etc.

You mean that they would not be willing, I guess. It's a problem for the EU as well. So the vaccination databases should be maintained in-country.

17 hours ago, sirineou said:

Absolutely right.

all that the "Vaccine passport" is , it's a certificate that everyone involved can trust. Any trusted organization that can collect that information from the pertinent agencies in each country in the world and provide it in a centralized database. Otherwise how is Thailand to know that a receipt from youbetistan is real.

IATA is a trusted organization, with recourses in every country and an interest in making travel easier and safe. 

 

This IATA solution concerns me because it seems to lack any thought to public health goals. Packing people on planes is the single-minded objective. It could undermine the WHO/Estonia effort which might help toward controlling Covid.