That should have started 15 years ago when China was still mostly just making trinkets.

In Iraq the Americans had a nickname for the British Army: "The borrowers".

[removed]

Reads small prints: Must hire Chinese workers.

Sounds like you care a lot.

[removed]

As I said, tragedy of the commons.

Hi batmaninwonderland. Your submission from time.com is behind a registration wall. A registration wall limits the number of free articles users can access before they are required to register an account to log in to continue reading it. While your submission was not removed, users are discouraged from upvoting it or commenting on it.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Historic mistakes and China go hand-in-hand though.

Give is 5 years and Xi will have everyone running pig-iron furnaces and killing half the birds.

[removed]

We're not allowed to post good news, sir. Only devastating news these days.

Why should India and South Africa move towards the US? Should it be on principle? Economic benefits?

This is why republicans wanted an auditor general but it got shot down

Because GE, Halburton, Baker Hughes, Fluor, Kellogg group etc.

[removed]

[deleted]

>while you say that Russia isn't capable of causing even more destruction in the region.

Their military is fully committed, there's nothing else they can do.

Notice that Ukraine is asking for all these things and are not worrying about "escalation". Strange, huh?

These delusional Putin propagandists whinging about "escalation" are on the other hand completely safe.

[deleted]

Destroy it.

Grow up man.

Those are “least concern”- they adapted to life well on the beaches, feasting on unwary tourists.

Good for them if the state allows it, but do you really want a state that doesn't follow it's own laws?

> They end up being used to push the war into Russia forcing a much more desperate defensive Russian escalation.

Pushing the war into Russia is a purely good thing, Ukraine needs to strike military assets on the Russian side in order to win the war. It's unambiguously good and there are no downsides.

>The ability to project into Russia increases Russia's willingness to retaliate openly or covertly against the nation giving the jet-- potentially forcing the escalation to full world war.

Russia lacks the capability to "retaliate", and they lack the casus belli as well. There is zero chance they do anything to the west no matter what type of weapon Ukraine is given. And they're already doing everything they possibly can to Ukraine, there's no further step in the escalation ladder.

>and I'm sure the world's top diplomats can't compare to your genius

The world's top diplomats and military leaders all agree with me on this.

>but there's some pretty obvious ways that this could create blowback

No, there's no possibility of weapon deliveries to Ukraine creating "blowback" from Russia. The only type of blowback you might see is in domestic politics, where you might lose the votes of fearful idiot voters. And even then that might only happen in a select few countries, considering citizens of most western nations overwhelmingly support the cause.

The bad news is that Russia might buy Chinese drones.

The good news is they are flimsy and likely defective.

No we can't get a break.