Biden’s APEC no-show seen as a blow to Thai government’s credibility

[BonMot]

2 hours ago, bang saen guy said:

I have an 80 year old friend travelling BKK- LAX next week. Please supply a link stating elders are no longer allowed to fly. Or possibly only your stupidity?

My mother just took a commercial five hour flight. She's 91. Thousands of elderly fly daily in US.

 

Biden is weak, infirm, mentally incapable. It's as plain as day.

[bang saen guy]

4 minutes ago, BonMot said:

My mother just took a commercial five hour flight. She's 91. Thousands of elderly fly daily in US.

 

Biden is weak, infirm, mentally incapable. It's as plain as day.

Can not argue with his mental health but was not the issue I don't believe. 

[Hawaiian]

31 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

I have not seen China interfering in other nation’s internal affairs or to try and instigate regime change so that’s a positive.

 

As to foreign aid, Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. The west has been doing the former in order to maintain control and dominance. Aid in the form of food and medical supplies solves a short term problem. It does nothing to address and resolve the underlying problems. China has provided a lot of aid in this manner. China also invests in the infrastructure which gives these countries a chance to develop. Some thinks of this as a debt trap. It’s really no different from a bank lending money to an individual to build their own home.

 

Lenders do due diligence to discover the ability of the borrower to pay back the loan.  Banks having a record of too many foreclosures get flagged for poor performance.  Foreclosures can be messy affairs which banks try to avoid. 

China on the other hand doesn't have to be concerned about loan defaults.  They just attach the collateral pledged, like shipping ports in Sri Lanka and Pakistan.  This ties in with their BRI program, which incidentally is not faring very well. I recently posted a link to video which talks about this.  This can be interpreted as interference since it almost always involves bribing local officials.  Cannot be.  China would never do such a thing.

[Gweiloman]

1 hour ago, Hawaiian said:

Lenders do due diligence to discover the ability of the borrower to pay back the loan.  Banks having a record of too many foreclosures get flagged for poor performance.  Foreclosures can be messy affairs which banks try to avoid. 

China on the other hand doesn't have to be concerned about loan defaults.  They just attach the collateral pledged, like shipping ports in Sri Lanka and Pakistan.  This ties in with their BRI program, which incidentally is not faring very well. I recently posted a link to video which talks about this.  This can be interpreted as interference since it almost always involves bribing local officials.  Cannot be.  China would never do such a thing.

If I’m not mistaken, one of worst banking crisis was caused by er, oh yes Lehman brothers of the sub-prime fame. Due diligence indeed.

 

The BRI program is much welcomed by those countries that are helped by it. Sure, there will be stumbles along the way, not unexpected when you are talking about the biggest infrastructure project the world has ever seen. In the end, all the countries involved will be greatly improved because of the BRI project.

[Hawaiian]

1 hour ago, Hawaiian said:

Lenders do due diligence to discover the ability of the borrower to pay back the loan.  Banks having a record of too many foreclosures get flagged for poor performance.  Foreclosures can be messy affairs which banks try to avoid. 

China on the other hand doesn't have to be concerned about loan defaults.  They just attach the collateral pledged, like shipping ports in Sri Lanka and Pakistan.  This ties in with their BRI program, which incidentally is not faring very well. I recently posted a link to video which talks about this.  This can be interpreted as interference since it almost always involves bribing local officials.  Cannot be.  China would never do such a thing.

https://dailyexcelsior.com/chinese-interference-in-south-asia/ 

[Hawaiian]

12 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

If I’m not mistaken, one of worst banking crisis was caused by er, oh yes Lehman brothers of the sub-prime fame. Due diligence indeed.

 

The BRI program is much welcomed by those countries that are helped by it. Sure, there will be stumbles along the way, not unexpected when you are talking about the biggest infrastructure project the world has ever seen. In the end, all the countries involved will be greatly improved because of the BRI project.

Good that you pointed out what happens when greed sets in and due diligence is not taken. My mistake for not stating "smart banks."  Lehman was not only not smart, but greedy.  A lesson China will learn the hard way.   Have you looked lately how that welcome mat is wearing thin?

[JimGant]

On 10/2/2022 at 12:29 PM, Jingthing said:

It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.

Churchill never experienced Trump.

 

When uneducated and/or easily-swayed folks have the vote, well, democracy doesn't work as intended. Thus, the best form of government: A benevolent dictatorship, where the  leader is smart, educated, fair-minded, and with high ideals. Hard to find? You bet. But, Lee Kuan Yew comes as close as you can find.

 

Quote

Was Singapore a dictatorship?

Singapore has thus been dubbed as one of the Four Asian Tigers. Lee Kuan Yew and his administration wielded absolute reign over Singaporean politics until 1990, while his People's Action Party has remained in power ever since, controlling Singapore as a dominant-party state. [And note that Lee Kuan Yew's son has, essentially, inherited the job. Fortunately, he has many of the traits that his dad had.]

Actually, the fair-minded folks dub Singapore as a "managed democracy." (So too Malaysia.) But just try and hold a political rally against the PAP -- you'll be carted away faster than same type rally in Thailand. Malaysia's even harder on such rallies. So, maybe Thailand as a managed democracy is what it's all about here in SE Asia. Now, if Thailand could just find its Lee Kuan Yew.....

 

Oh, and if you ask the Singaporean in the street (unless he has long hair and chews gum) if he's unhappy that he can't demonstrate in the streets against his government? You'll get the same shrug that you'll get in the streets of Beijing -- who needs to demonstrate, as our leaders have made our lives much better over the last few decades. (Probably the same answer in the streets of Hanoi or Saigon.)

 

So, what's so great about a Western style democracy in Asia? Oh, yeah -- the uneducated and/or easily swayed get to vote. And, like with a box of chocolates, well, you know the rest of Forest Gump's retort.

[spidermike007]

2 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

Why should China or any other country build any infrastructure projects for free? Can you name any bank that is willing to give you money without having to repay it?

 

You don’t trust the CCP. That’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that at all. Every country does what’s in their best interest.

Thailand would likely not be where they are today, without the US spending billions on infrastructure here in the 1950's and 1960's. For free. No loans, just a gift. Of course in return they got Thailand as a place to stage invasions into Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam. But, it was not a Chinese, CCP style loan and indebtedness. 

[Hawaiian]

2 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

Why should China or any other country build any infrastructure projects for free? Can you name any bank that is willing to give you money without having to repay it?

 

You don’t trust the CCP. That’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that at all. Every country does what’s in their best interest.

While not exactly a bank, the U.S. government gives out tons of money "without having to repaying it."

[Hawaiian]

41 minutes ago, JimGant said:

Churchill never experienced Trump.

 

When uneducated and/or easily-swayed folks have the vote, well, democracy doesn't work as intended. Thus, the best form of government: A benevolent dictatorship, where the  leader is smart, educated, fair-minded, and with high ideals. Hard to find? You bet. But, Lee Kuan Yew comes as close as you can find.

 

Actually, the fair-minded folks dub Singapore as a "managed democracy." (So too Malaysia.) But just try and hold a political rally against the PAP -- you'll be carted away faster than same type rally in Thailand. Malaysia's even harder on such rallies. So, maybe Thailand as a managed democracy is what it's all about here in SE Asia. Now, if Thailand could just find its Lee Kuan Yew.....

 

Oh, and if you ask the Singaporean in the street (unless he has long hair and chews gum) if he's unhappy that he can't demonstrate in the streets against his government? You'll get the same shrug that you'll get in the streets of Beijing -- who needs to demonstrate, as our leaders have made our lives much better over the last few decades. (Probably the same answer in the streets of Hanoi or Saigon.)

 

So, what's so great about a Western style democracy in Asia? Oh, yeah -- the uneducated and/or easily swayed get to vote. And, like with a box of chocolates, well, you know the rest of Forest Gump's retort.

Being educated does not necessarily mean voting for the "right candidate."

[JimGant]

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

I challenge you to name just one country that China has helped with infrastructure, without a loan. Bet you cannot. Foreign aid on any level, is an alien concept to them.

Of course. The Chinese are businessmen -- the Jews of the Orient. So why would they give money away, when they can get the same results with an interest-bearing loan vs.  a giveaway. Certainly, the US Treasury would look a lot sounder with drawers full of IOU's, and not empty drawers once housing giveaways....

[Gweiloman]

1 hour ago, JimGant said:

Churchill never experienced Trump.

 

When uneducated and/or easily-swayed folks have the vote, well, democracy doesn't work as intended. Thus, the best form of government: A benevolent dictatorship, where the  leader is smart, educated, fair-minded, and with high ideals. Hard to find? You bet. But, Lee Kuan Yew comes as close as you can find.

 

Actually, the fair-minded folks dub Singapore as a "managed democracy." (So too Malaysia.) But just try and hold a political rally against the PAP -- you'll be carted away faster than same type rally in Thailand. Malaysia's even harder on such rallies. So, maybe Thailand as a managed democracy is what it's all about here in SE Asia. Now, if Thailand could just find its Lee Kuan Yew.....

 

Oh, and if you ask the Singaporean in the street (unless he has long hair and chews gum) if he's unhappy that he can't demonstrate in the streets against his government? You'll get the same shrug that you'll get in the streets of Beijing -- who needs to demonstrate, as our leaders have made our lives much better over the last few decades. (Probably the same answer in the streets of Hanoi or Saigon.)

 

So, what's so great about a Western style democracy in Asia? Oh, yeah -- the uneducated and/or easily swayed get to vote. And, like with a box of chocolates, well, you know the rest of Forest Gump's retort.

Best post ever. You hit the nail right on the head. Open democracy works for some, managed democracy for others and authoritarianism for yet others. I don’t understand why some can’t see that there is no one size fits all.

[Pattaya Spotter]

Not having President "Where's Jackie?" attend is no loss.

[Gweiloman]

1 hour ago, Hawaiian said:

Good that you pointed out what happens when greed sets in and due diligence is not taken. My mistake for not stating "smart banks."  Lehman was not only not smart, but greedy.  A lesson China will learn the hard way.   Have you looked lately how that welcome mat is wearing thin?

Have you looked lately how that welcome mat is wearing thin?

Don’t know about that but it seems to me that more and more nations are turning away from the west and looking east. These countries are fed up with the hypocrisy and arrogance of some of these western countries.

[Gweiloman]

10 minutes ago, Pattaya Spotter said:

Not having President "Where's Jackie?" attend is no loss.

He seems to be causing trouble everywhere he goes so Thailand might be silently breathing a sigh of relief that he’s not coming. All that remains is what gaffes the other one might commit. Maybe praising Myanmar?

[Hawaiian]

2 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

Have you looked lately how that welcome mat is wearing thin?

Don’t know about that but it seems to me that more and more nations are turning away from the west and looking east. These countries are fed up with the hypocrisy and arrogance of some of these western countries.

They may be looking east but not necessarily to China.  Shopping, yes.  Buying, maybe, maybe not.

[Gweiloman]

2 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

They may be looking east but not necessarily to China.  Shopping, yes.  Buying, maybe, maybe not.

China currently has arguably the best track record where infrastructure construction is concerned. Also, one of the world’s leaders in 5G tech. So pretty much a no brainier for developing countries wanting to develop.

 

But like you said, maybe, maybe not. Time will tell.

[billd766]

18 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

Pathetic. Questions not directed at you as you have nothing of value to add. Learn to mind your own business.

You should also learn that this is a discussion forum. He has exactly the same right as you, i or any other poster to reply to any post.

 

If you don't think that he should reply then become a moderator or report him because YOU don't think he should reply.

 

If you don't like my response then report me to the mods.

7 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

I have not seen China interfering in other nation’s internal affairs or to try and instigate regime change so that’s a positive.

 

As to foreign aid, Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. The west has been doing the former in order to maintain control and dominance. Aid in the form of food and medical supplies solves a short term problem. It does nothing to address and resolve the underlying problems. China has provided a lot of aid in this manner. China also invests in the infrastructure which gives these countries a chance to develop. Some thinks of this as a debt trap. It’s really no different from a bank lending money to an individual to build their own home.

 

Did you not hear about the Paracel Islands?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=paracel+islands+dispute&sxsrf=ALiCzsbhd2L08yIApbbHczNeeT5BLuslMw%3A1664798602925&source=hp&ei=is86Y9b8NYaWseMPm4ivqAI&iflsig=AJiK0e8AAAAAYzrdmlh1Tnua5rQ1rkGZD9BRDp7Tqc8g&oq=paracel&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAEYADIECAAQQzIECC4QQzIECAAQQzIFCC4QgAQyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEIAEMgUILhCABDIFCAAQgAQ6BAgjECc6CwgAEIAEELEDEIMBOgUIABCRAjoKCAAQsQMQgwEQQzoICAAQgAQQsQM6EQguEIAEELEDEIMBEMcBEK8BOgsILhCABBCxAxCDAToICC4QgAQQsQM6DgguEIAEELEDEMcBEK8BUABYtBJg6CZoAHAAeACAAYABiAH_BZIBAzIuNZgBAKABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz

 

The Battle of the Paracel Islands (Chinese: 西沙海战, Pinyin: Xisha Haizhan；Vietnamese: Hải chiến Hoàng Sa) was a military engagement between the naval forces of China and South Vietnam in the Paracel Islands on January 19, 1974.

 

Or even the Spratly Islands?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands_dispute

 

The Spratly Islands dispute is an ongoing territorial dispute between China, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Brunei, concerning "ownership" of the Spratly Islands, a group of islands and associated "maritime features" (reefs, banks, and cays etc.) located in the South China Sea. The dispute is characterized by diplomatic stalemate and the employment of military pressure techniques (such as military occupation of disputed territory) in the advancement of national territorial claims. All except Brunei occupy some of the maritime features.

 

https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/territorial-disputes-south-china-sea

 

Background

China’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea—and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—have antagonized competing claimants Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. As early as the 1970s, countries began to claim islands and various zones in the South China Sea, such as the Spratly Islands, which possess rich natural resources and fishing areas.

China maintains [PDF] that, under international law, foreign militaries are not able to conduct intelligence-gathering activities, such as reconnaissance flights, in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). According to the United States, claimant countries, under UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), should have freedom of navigation through EEZs in the sea and are not required to notify claimants of military activities. In July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague issued its ruling on a claim brought against China by the Philippines under UNCLOS, ruling in favor of the Philippines on almost every count. While China is a signatory to the treaty, which established the tribunal, it refuses to accept the court’s authority.

 

Background

China’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea—and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—have antagonized competing claimants Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. As early as the 1970s, countries began to claim islands and various zones in the South China Sea, such as the Spratly Islands, which possess rich natural resources and fishing areas.

China maintains [PDF] that, under international law, foreign militaries are not able to conduct intelligence-gathering activities, such as reconnaissance flights, in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). According to the United States, claimant countries, under UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), should have freedom of navigation through EEZs in the sea and are not required to notify claimants of military activities. In July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague issued its ruling on a claim brought against China by the Philippines under UNCLOS, ruling in favor of the Philippines on almost every count. While China is a signatory to the treaty, which established the tribunal, it refuses to accept the court’s authority.

 

Do a Google search about China claims and invasions, there are lots out there.

[zzaa09]

Occidental Empires or Oriental Despots. 

Tough choice.

 

 

 

[Gweiloman]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

You should also learn that this is a discussion forum. He has exactly the same right as you, i or any other poster to reply to any post.

 

If you don't think that he should reply then become a moderator or report him because YOU don't think he should reply.

 

If you don't like my response then report me to the mods.

Did you not hear about the Paracel Islands?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=paracel+islands+dispute&sxsrf=ALiCzsbhd2L08yIApbbHczNeeT5BLuslMw%3A1664798602925&source=hp&ei=is86Y9b8NYaWseMPm4ivqAI&iflsig=AJiK0e8AAAAAYzrdmlh1Tnua5rQ1rkGZD9BRDp7Tqc8g&oq=paracel&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAEYADIECAAQQzIECC4QQzIECAAQQzIFCC4QgAQyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEIAEMgUILhCABDIFCAAQgAQ6BAgjECc6CwgAEIAEELEDEIMBOgUIABCRAjoKCAAQsQMQgwEQQzoICAAQgAQQsQM6EQguEIAEELEDEIMBEMcBEK8BOgsILhCABBCxAxCDAToICC4QgAQQsQM6DgguEIAEELEDEMcBEK8BUABYtBJg6CZoAHAAeACAAYABiAH_BZIBAzIuNZgBAKABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz

 

The Battle of the Paracel Islands (Chinese: 西沙海战, Pinyin: Xisha Haizhan；Vietnamese: Hải chiến Hoàng Sa) was a military engagement between the naval forces of China and South Vietnam in the Paracel Islands on January 19, 1974.

 

Or even the Spratly Islands?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands_dispute

 

The Spratly Islands dispute is an ongoing territorial dispute between China, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Brunei, concerning "ownership" of the Spratly Islands, a group of islands and associated "maritime features" (reefs, banks, and cays etc.) located in the South China Sea. The dispute is characterized by diplomatic stalemate and the employment of military pressure techniques (such as military occupation of disputed territory) in the advancement of national territorial claims. All except Brunei occupy some of the maritime features.

 

https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/territorial-disputes-south-china-sea

 

Background

China’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea—and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—have antagonized competing claimants Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. As early as the 1970s, countries began to claim islands and various zones in the South China Sea, such as the Spratly Islands, which possess rich natural resources and fishing areas.

China maintains [PDF] that, under international law, foreign militaries are not able to conduct intelligence-gathering activities, such as reconnaissance flights, in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). According to the United States, claimant countries, under UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), should have freedom of navigation through EEZs in the sea and are not required to notify claimants of military activities. In July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague issued its ruling on a claim brought against China by the Philippines under UNCLOS, ruling in favor of the Philippines on almost every count. While China is a signatory to the treaty, which established the tribunal, it refuses to accept the court’s authority.

 

Background

China’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea—and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—have antagonized competing claimants Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. As early as the 1970s, countries began to claim islands and various zones in the South China Sea, such as the Spratly Islands, which possess rich natural resources and fishing areas.

China maintains [PDF] that, under international law, foreign militaries are not able to conduct intelligence-gathering activities, such as reconnaissance flights, in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). According to the United States, claimant countries, under UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), should have freedom of navigation through EEZs in the sea and are not required to notify claimants of military activities. In July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague issued its ruling on a claim brought against China by the Philippines under UNCLOS, ruling in favor of the Philippines on almost every count. While China is a signatory to the treaty, which established the tribunal, it refuses to accept the court’s authority.

 

Do a Google search about China claims and invasions, there are lots out there.

Seems to me you are talking about border disputes. This happens all the time with many countries such as Brunei, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan… the countries you mentioned in your post.

 

Border disputes are not the same as regime change. The west is very active in the latter. Do a google search if you want examples.

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

You should also learn that this is a discussion forum. He has exactly the same right as you, i or any other poster to reply to any post.

 

If you don't think that he should reply then become a moderator or report him because YOU don't think he should reply.

 

If you don't like my response then report me to the mods.

Did you not hear about the Paracel Islands?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=paracel+islands+dispute&sxsrf=ALiCzsbhd2L08yIApbbHczNeeT5BLuslMw%3A1664798602925&source=hp&ei=is86Y9b8NYaWseMPm4ivqAI&iflsig=AJiK0e8AAAAAYzrdmlh1Tnua5rQ1rkGZD9BRDp7Tqc8g&oq=paracel&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAEYADIECAAQQzIECC4QQzIECAAQQzIFCC4QgAQyBQgAEIAEMgUIABCABDIFCAAQgAQyBQgAEIAEMgUILhCABDIFCAAQgAQ6BAgjECc6CwgAEIAEELEDEIMBOgUIABCRAjoKCAAQsQMQgwEQQzoICAAQgAQQsQM6EQguEIAEELEDEIMBEMcBEK8BOgsILhCABBCxAxCDAToICC4QgAQQsQM6DgguEIAEELEDEMcBEK8BUABYtBJg6CZoAHAAeACAAYABiAH_BZIBAzIuNZgBAKABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz

 

The Battle of the Paracel Islands (Chinese: 西沙海战, Pinyin: Xisha Haizhan；Vietnamese: Hải chiến Hoàng Sa) was a military engagement between the naval forces of China and South Vietnam in the Paracel Islands on January 19, 1974.

 

Or even the Spratly Islands?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands_dispute

 

The Spratly Islands dispute is an ongoing territorial dispute between China, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Brunei, concerning "ownership" of the Spratly Islands, a group of islands and associated "maritime features" (reefs, banks, and cays etc.) located in the South China Sea. The dispute is characterized by diplomatic stalemate and the employment of military pressure techniques (such as military occupation of disputed territory) in the advancement of national territorial claims. All except Brunei occupy some of the maritime features.

 

https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/territorial-disputes-south-china-sea

 

Background

China’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea—and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—have antagonized competing claimants Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. As early as the 1970s, countries began to claim islands and various zones in the South China Sea, such as the Spratly Islands, which possess rich natural resources and fishing areas.

China maintains [PDF] that, under international law, foreign militaries are not able to conduct intelligence-gathering activities, such as reconnaissance flights, in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). According to the United States, claimant countries, under UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), should have freedom of navigation through EEZs in the sea and are not required to notify claimants of military activities. In July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague issued its ruling on a claim brought against China by the Philippines under UNCLOS, ruling in favor of the Philippines on almost every count. While China is a signatory to the treaty, which established the tribunal, it refuses to accept the court’s authority.

 

Background

China’s sweeping claims of sovereignty over the sea—and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—have antagonized competing claimants Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. As early as the 1970s, countries began to claim islands and various zones in the South China Sea, such as the Spratly Islands, which possess rich natural resources and fishing areas.

China maintains [PDF] that, under international law, foreign militaries are not able to conduct intelligence-gathering activities, such as reconnaissance flights, in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). According to the United States, claimant countries, under UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), should have freedom of navigation through EEZs in the sea and are not required to notify claimants of military activities. In July 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague issued its ruling on a claim brought against China by the Philippines under UNCLOS, ruling in favor of the Philippines on almost every count. While China is a signatory to the treaty, which established the tribunal, it refuses to accept the court’s authority.

 

Do a Google search about China claims and invasions, there are lots out there.

China is also a dab hand with its covert action against other nations with its "50 cents army" a group of 500,000 - 2 million state-backed internet commenters. Even used widely on their own territory to curb dissent and influence opinion especially during the covid outbreak.

 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2022 

China influence operation targeted US midterm elections

Fake social media accounts originating in the world’s second-largest economy peddled partisan attacks to American voters, according to a report from Meta.

Edited October 3, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[Gweiloman]

21 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

China is also a dab hand with its covert action against other nations with its "50 cents army" a group of 500,000 - 2 million state-backed internet commenters. Even used widely on their own territory to curb dissent and influence opinion especially during the covid outbreak.

 

SEPTEMBER 27, 2022 

China influence operation targeted US midterm elections

Fake social media accounts originating in the world’s second-largest economy peddled partisan attacks to American voters, according to a report from Meta.

https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/publication/unheard-voice-evaluating-five-years-pro-western-covert-influence-operations-takedown
 

What’s good for the goose…

[Bkk Brian]

25 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/publication/unheard-voice-evaluating-five-years-pro-western-covert-influence-operations-takedown
 

What’s good for the goose…

Absolutely when you have up to 2 million internet warriors from China influencing elections, creating campaigns with consistently advanced narratives on how evil the US and the west is as opposed to China, hacking US and western government entities then what do you expect. Got your 50 cent yet...lol

[Gweiloman]

18 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Absolutely when you have up to 2 million internet warriors from China influencing elections, creating campaigns with consistently advanced narratives on how evil the US and the west is as opposed to China, hacking US and western government entities then what do you expect. Got your 50 cent yet...lol

Most Americans, I would imagine, get most of their news from the local networks or CNN, FOX, MSNBC etc. Far as I can tell, all these networks are anti-China. So how do the 2 million warriors influence anything in America? By broadcasting subliminal messages while America sleeps?

 

Maybe Trump is in China’s pocket as everything he has done for the last 6-7 years and continue to do today has been very effective in destroying America, from within. He has caused Americans to hate each other, accuse the DOJ, FBI of being corrupt and fascist (or is that left’s weapon against the right), causes irreparable damage to the whole justice system and so on and so forth.

 

If I could, I wonder definitely vote Trump in 2024.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Gweiloman said:

Most Americans, I would imagine, get most of their news from the local networks or CNN, FOX, MSNBC etc. Far as I can tell, all these networks are anti-China. So how do the 2 million warriors influence anything in America? By broadcasting subliminal messages while America sleeps?

 

Maybe Trump is in China’s pocket as everything he has done for the last 6-7 years and continue to do today has been very effective in destroying America, from within. He has caused Americans to hate each other, accuse the DOJ, FBI of being corrupt and fascist (or is that left’s weapon against the right), causes irreparable damage to the whole justice system and so on and so forth.

 

If I could, I wonder definitely vote Trump in 2024.

How do they influence? well you could read the link I posted, since you didn't bother I wont bother responding with any more

[watthong]

Biden might be thought of as infirmed, confused and whatnot, let those who Palovianly caw at the mention of the old man's name fill in the blank. That said, he played his part beautifully, that of a knight in shining armor in November 2020. And to the majority of the American people, who voted for him with all their heart and mind, that's how he will be remembered. At present, we couldn't be more proud seeing our guy dignified and respected, not as a pathetic joke, by and on the world stage.

 

Friendly reminder - in a democracy, it's the majority that count. The riff raff, domestic or otherwise, of course would not consent to that notion. For them it's the LOUDEST that count (that's why those appearing on their podium always have to foam at the mouth before any word is spoken.)

[Gweiloman]

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

How do they influence? well you could read the link I posted, since you didn't bother I wont bother responding with any more

Strange thing about your link is that the US intelligence concluded that China did not try to interfere 

 

https://www.odni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ICA-declass-16MAR21.pdf

 

I don’t understand why you are proving my points for me.

[Gweiloman]

44 minutes ago, watthong said:

Biden might be thought of as infirmed, confused and whatnot, let those who Palovianly caw at the mention of the old man's name fill in the blank. That said, he played his part beautifully, that of a knight in shining armor in November 2020. And to the majority of the American people, who voted for him with all their heart and mind, that's how he will be remembered. At present, we couldn't be more proud seeing our guy dignified and respected, not as a pathetic joke, by and on the world stage.

 

Friendly reminder - in a democracy, it's the majority that count. The riff raff, domestic or otherwise, of course would not consent to that notion. For them it's the LOUDEST that count (that's why those appearing on their podium always have to foam at the mouth before any word is spoken.)

If I’m not mistaken, Trump didn’t get a majority in 2016. He didn’t get the majority either in 2020 and yet, almost half the country believes that he won. 
 

Not sure if this democratic model should be exported to the rest of the world.

[Hawaiian]

12 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

I have not seen China interfering in other nation’s internal affairs or to try and instigate regime change so that’s a positive.

 

As to foreign aid, Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. The west has been doing the former in order to maintain control and dominance. Aid in the form of food and medical supplies solves a short term problem. It does nothing to address and resolve the underlying problems. China has provided a lot of aid in this manner. China also invests in the infrastructure which gives these countries a chance to develop. Some thinks of this as a debt trap. It’s really no different from a bank lending money to an individual to build their own home.

 

Others will disagree with you about China's meddling in the internal affairs of other countries.

Read this:  https://www.dailyexcelsior.com/chinese-interference-in-south-asia/   Or as one poster has said you don't click on links that counter your comments.

[Hawaiian]

2 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

If I’m not mistaken, Trump didn’t get a majority in 2016. He didn’t get the majority either in 2020 and yet, almost half the country believes that he won. 
 

Not sure if this democratic model should be exported to the rest of the world.

Election disputes and issues of voter fraud are not unique to the U.S.  This happens all over the world in democratic and not so democratic nations.  As mentioned in a previous post, one size does not fit all.