164
The U.S. Industrial Base Is Not Prepared for a Possible Conflict with China
(features.csis.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
164 points (100.0% liked)
news
23564 readers
770 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't have a more up to date one, but I would bet money that nothing fundamentally changed in the past 5 years.
I mean a lot has fundamentally changed in the last 5 years... š¤·
Nothing has fundamentally changed in terms of supply chains in US that rely on China.
This is question begging.
Feel free to provide evidence to support your unsubstantiated claims. So far it looks like what's actually happening US is actively becoming more dependent on China. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202403/1308390.shtml
I'm not making claims. I'm asking for more info because what you gave was insufficient.
You literally claimed things changed fundamentally earlier without any evidence to back that up. You haven't even bothered to substantiate your assertion that the ample evidence you were already provided with is insufficient.
Incorrect. I said that there is reported decoupling. Your chart doesn't cover the period of the supposed decoupling so I'm requesting information that covers that period too. That is all I have said or requested. Quote me otherwise. I've been very careful with how I've written.
Unless you can provide actual evidence that some dramatic changed happened during that period, then there's no point to continue this discussion. Your whole argument hinges on an assumption that you've provided no basis for.
I don't have to provide evidence because I am not the one making assertions.
You literally are making assertions.
Quote me.
I am not asserting there is decoupling. There is reported decoupling and I'm asking for a counter perspective. This really isn't that hard.
post a link to this āreported decouplingā. a link with data, not speculation. the users above provided data of a trend of increased reliance on China for manufacturing inputs. if you have data that indicates the trend has reversed, show it to us. otherwise, you are just mindlessly guessing
Bro, do you understand what a request for information is, or is everything a debate to you?
dont "bro" me. also ur the one being a debate pedant. users gave data about trade with China. then you made a claim that there was "reported decoupling" but didnt provide evidence. not only did you not provide evidence for decoupling, you didnt even provide evidence for the supposed reports. arguing in bad faith is against CoC. so stop being a debate pervert, stop arguing for the sake of arguing, and stop assuming you dont have to support your claims
Why are you like this?
I am not asserting decoupling. I am saying that I have been told there is decoupling by others and I'm asking for a counter perspective. This really isn't that hard.
You said that there has been reported decoupling. That is an assertion. The fact that you are trying to worm your way out of it by way of semantics is just sad.
Here is an example of this reporting: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-22/what-is-us-china-decoupling-and-how-is-it-happening
TO BE CLEAR I AM NOT I AGREEMENT WITH THIS LINK. I AM NOT TAKING A POSITION ON THIS MATTER. I AM ONLY REQUESTING AN ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINT BECAUSE I WANT TO BE INFORMED. THIS IS NOT A DEBATE.
Good on you, you were able to post an article. Why did we have to go thru so much tooth pulling to get here?
Because i am not advocating for a position. You can Google it yourself dude.
You are now again trying to worm your way out. No one has said you are advocating for a position. You made assertions and you maintained you had not made any. You maintained you did not have anything to share, nor did you have to share anything. You are now trying to make it into seeming as if the disagreement was one of misunderstanding, where it was believed you held these positions, which you now claim you do not. this is worm behaviour.
No moron, you think you're in a debate because youre a keyboard warrior going aggro at the slightest interrupt of your circle jerk.
The only "assertion" I've made is that there has been reporting that there is decoupling between China and the US economies. And this is true! There is reporting! I'm not even claiming the reporting is correct, I've only requested alternative perspectives with evidence! That is all.
I have been very clear and up front from the beginning. You however are a dog chasing parked cars.
The issue is not a misunderstanding. It's you being an idiot.
I have not taken a stance anywhere in this thread about whether or not China and the US are decoupling. If this was otherwise you could prove it with a quote. But you can't. Because you're trying to fight someone who isn't interested in a debate. Idiot.
Buddy we're not in a debate. You lied and you kept pretending to not have lied, which I held you to. You then finally did the bare minimum and I asked why it had to be such a task for you to do the bare minimum.
I didn't read the rest of your response because it's clear you're trying to fabricate situations and discussions out of thin air for which I have no interest. You were doing wormy debatelord shit and you are trying to do wormy debatelord shit. Eat dirt.
I'm literally the one saying this isn't a debate, dude.
I didn't lie. You're just an idiot.
You straight made assertions, said you didn't make assertions, got told you did, asked to be quoted, got quoted, and started insisting we were having a debate (by way of insisting that you were not interested in having a debate, thereby implying we were having one) about the assertion YOU MADE and struggled so hard to not post a single piece of proof of existing. When you finally share a single article you start talking about not having a debate, as if we've at any point discussed anything but the fact that you are acting as a debatelord.
We haven't at any point talked about the assertion itself, merely the fact that you keep making them and somehow you feels as if you don't. After finally doing the bare minimum which you ask of others, you try to make it out to be as if something else is going on.
I will now block you. Goodbye.
The only assertion I made was that there had been reporting of decoupling. I did not assert there had been decoupling. If you can't understand the difference between those two then I really can't help you. At worst I spoke sloppy to a pendant.
No way, jack