this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2026
45 points (100.0% liked)
World News
3316 readers
86 users here now
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
🇺🇸🇨🇳 Top US military officials admit energy dominance is central to US geopolitical strategy including using "geography" (straits) to "impose costs" (blockade) "competitors" (China).
The full hearing is here: https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/to-receive-testimony-on-the-posture-of-united-states-indo-pacific-command-and-united-states-forces-korea-in-review-of-the-defense-authorization-request-for-fiscal-year-2027-and-the-future-years-defense-program
The problem is no one watches these hearings or reads the policy papers these statements are echoing.
Instead, many are listening to the garbled version of this filtered through daily Western political theater by politicians who are repeating talking points they themselves don't understand and often are tasked with deliberately misrepresenting or directing attention away from these policies.
I know 2-3 hour long hearings and 200 page policy papers are a lot to work through but they have been telling us the plan for years through both.
If you listen to the hearing the US is obviously planning to impose the same sort of servile dependence Europe is already under upon Japan, South Korea, Philippines and Australia.
The US plans to use its control over these nations to create battering rams against China just like Europe serves against Russia.
The US war on Iran and its direct/indirect blockade on the Strait of Hormuz has already accelerated this process by weaponozing access to energy - ruling out normal economic activity for its proxies and forcing them into war-time postures.
The US Senate hearing begins by talking about Iran and quickly links it to China - pointing out China as the number one priority the US must resolve.
https://t.me/brianlovethailand/4792
It makes sense from the angle of putting other countries into deeper dependency on the US, but, this also opens up China's electrification to new markets. Japan, South Korea, Philippines and Australia have a choice between US oil/gas or cheaper+cleaner Chinese solar/batteries. It was too late before the war even started.
Even on Wikipedia, there’s a rule not to cite primary sources.
wait, what
why? wouldn't primary sources be the most reliable?
Because they don’t want primary sources to be interpreted “the wrong way”.
Do you have a link to this guideline? I remember that original research is not allowed, but not a rule against primary sources. 🤔
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Handling_primary,_secondary_and_tertiary_sources_(proposed_guideline)