Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Over the past few days, China has made some many headlines in the western media: hacking charges, gas deal with Russia, and anti china riots in Vietnam. Where is the west so obsessed with China's development?
Because deals like the following have massive impacts on the entire world - not just China:
$400 BILLION Gas Deal!
I remember when numbers with six figures looked big. But now, even millions don't count anymore. Look at this number - $400,000,000,000.00 Can you really get your mind around it?
400 B over 30 years. It is just 10 B a year. less than 1% of China's annual import.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sargentodiaz
Because deals like the following have massive impacts on the entire world - not just China:
$400 BILLION Gas Deal!
I remember when numbers with six figures looked big. But now, even millions don't count anymore. Look at this number - $400,000,000,000.00 Can you really get your mind around it?
400 B over 30 years. It is just 10 B a year. less than 1% of China's annual import.
But it's still a huge deal nonetheless.
The hacking story is im the headlines because it's a political spat between two of the most powerful nations on earth, and is less because of China's development than it is because of alleged government-perpetrated corporate espionage.
The anti-China riots in Vietnam, I hadn't heard about till I saw the thread here. It didn't pop on the front pages of CNN, BBC, or NBC news as far as I noticed...
I'm not surprised you'd bring this up as an attempt to make a dig at the West while boosting China, but really the biggest headlines are about Thailand's situation, so you may as well ask why the West is so obsessed with Thailand's internal strife.
The hacking story is im the headlines because it's a political spat between two of the most powerful nations on earth, and is less because of China's development than it is because of alleged government-perpetrated corporate espionage.
The anti-China riots in Vietnam, I hadn't heard about till I saw the thread here. It didn't pop on the front pages of CNN, BBC, or NBC news as far as I noticed...
I'm not surprised you'd bring this up as an attempt to make a dig at the West while boosting China, but really the biggest headlines are about Thailand's situation, so you may as well ask why the West is so obsessed with Thailand's internal strife.
more importantly, transaction will completely bypass US dollar, which is a slap on Obama's face.
Honestly, Obama should know better than the US "sanctions" isn't as effective as before and stop playing that card that recklessly. Without consent of China, any economic saction by the west is only half effective at best.
It is great news for both Russia and China and judging from the timing, I guess China got a good deal.
Obama's administration is in an unenviable position. It's inherited the world's most powerful military and most powerful economy, along with a populace that is more war weary and disillusioned towards the matter than at any point in its history, and a populace that has less economic power than at any point in the last half century plus. He tried to get hawkish on Syria but the US populace opposed it and he did the right thing and bscked off. That he did it was a misstep because doing so allowed Russia to look tougher without actually doing anything. The Ukraine situation was hopeless because similarly, the US couldn't be forced to care about Ukraine and so the possibility of the US backing an effort to provide it with military assistance would have been shot down.
The US and NATO aren't the only major players in the world and Russia, who never really became fully Western in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse, can just as easily turn to the East as to the West. All told, it hedges more influence in the developing East than it could in the developed West... it doesn't need the US any more than the US needs it - somewhat unlike China and the US' relationship, where each relies on the other so heavily to the point that they basically are engaged in economic mutually-assured destruction. China is quite free to pick up any slack it can that the West doesn't, whether that's in Africa or Asia or Russia.
Obama's administration is in an unenviable position. It's inherited the world's most powerful military and most powerful economy, along with a populace that is more war weary and disillusioned towards the matter than at any point in its history, and a populace that has less economic power than at any point in the last half century plus. He tried to get hawkish on Syria but the US populace opposed it and he did the right thing and bscked off. That he did it was a misstep because doing so allowed Russia to look tougher without actually doing anything. The Ukraine situation was hopeless because similarly, the US couldn't be forced to care about Ukraine and so the possibility of the US backing an effort to provide it with military assistance would have been shot down.
The US and NATO aren't the only major players in the world and Russia, who never really became fully Western in the aftermath of the Soviet collapse, can just as easily turn to the East as to the West. All told, it hedges more influence in the developing East than it could in the developed West... it doesn't need the US any more than the US needs it - somewhat unlike China and the US' relationship, where each relies on the other so heavily to the point that they basically are engaged in economic mutually-assured destruction. China is quite free to pick up any slack it can that the West doesn't, whether that's in Africa or Asia or Russia.
You talk as if the US has to meddle with world affairs.
Just butt out and mind its internal busiess, not possible? What does Syria and Ukraine have anything to do with the US being thousands of miles away? Did anyone attack Washington?
Anyone should know when you account for only 20% of world economy, you are simply not powerful enough to keep paying world cop. Why not return to its founding principles - not caring about world affairs? Does it have enough sh*t at home to care?
You talk as if the US has to meddle with world affairs.
Just butt out and mind its internal busiess, not possible? What does Syria and Ukraine have anything to do with the US being thousands of miles away? Did anyone attack Washington?
Anyone should know when you account for only 20% of world economy, you are simply not powerful enough to keep paying world cop. Why not return to its founding principles - not caring about world affairs? Does it have enough sh*t at home to care?
Chill, boy... I in absolutely no way, shape or form said or even took a tone that the US or Obama "has to" meddle with world affairs. I mean, maybe my post wasn't negative enough towards the US for your tastes but what about my saying that he did the right thing and backed off from Syria due to the US populaces' opposition to meddling in the affair, that this populace has less economoc power than in the last few generations, or stating that China is free to take advantage of situations in which the West is slacking is possibly saying that it "has to," or for that matter has any right or obligation to get into the rest of the world's business?
You're not arguing with me, since we are basically not in disagreement on the matter; you're arguing with your own biases, prejudices, and inability to temper them.
Chill, boy... I in absolutely no way, shape or form said or even took a tone that the US or Obama "has to" meddle with world affairs. I mean, maybe my post wasn't negative enough towards the US for your tastes but what about my saying that he did the right thing and backed off from Syria due to the US populaces' opposition to meddling in the affair, that this populace has less economoc power than in the last few generations, or stating that China is free to take advantage of situations in which the West is slacking is possibly saying that it "has to," or for that matter has any right or obligation to get into the rest of the world's business?
You're not arguing with me, since we are basically not in disagreement on the matter; you're arguing with your own biases, prejudices, and inability to temper them.
I apologize for being a bit snarky.
I am negative about the US only when it comes to foreign affairs. It is still one of the greatest countries in the world. Just so tired of western countries pointing fingers as if they are somehow superior. And with respect to China, it has even more internal problems to solve before even considering playing a more important role in world affairs.
I was watching China TV News "CCNEWS" and it seemed due to the amount of coverage of the FBI indictment of the 5 Chinese military officers on CCNEWS that the Chinese are quite upset over this. One Chinese professor suggested the criminal indictment of the 5 Chinese high ranking military officers from the U.S. is a message from the Americans that they are displeased that the Chinese government are proceeding with the Russian gas deal despite the urging of the Americans not to because the Americans want to economically isolate the Russians.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
