Iraqi would have probably gone tits up in the so called 'Arab Spring' in 2011 the same as Syria and Libya, with a bit of meddling from Iran, even without Uncle SAM in 2003.

Mind you Saddam was popular. He used to get 100% of the votes during election time.
Might have had less british soldiers being maimed or killed if the arab spring had happened 8 years later.
Yes, they did -the Soviets shrugged, told some Ukrainian farmers they were to cultivate grain, thank you and bought the rest of their grain elsewhere, while US farmers suffered considerably.

It was another brilliant piece of work by Jimmy Carter. The Soviets had to get their imported grain from nations where the labour costs were lower and the transport costs similar, so they ended up paying less than they had, while Carter chose to overlook (some cynics say forgot about) an agreement that the US would send eight million tons of grain to the USSR each year and didn't rescind it, simply banning the sale of anything more than that amount.

The end result was that the Soviets developed a measure of food security in terms of their own grain production and found South American farmers were delighted to step in to sell them (cheaper) grain. The Canadians followed suite not long after, and I seem to think that the Australians did as well. The fact that the US was still selling 8 million tons of grain meant that protests that 5EYE allies shouldn't be selling grain to the Soviets when the US wasn't met with the response 'Er.... but you are' and the inevitable 'Er...ah.... yes.... ummmm' from the State Department.

As it was Jimmy Carter's way of appearing tough on the Soviets ('we'll starve American farmers into submission'), he refused to revoke the sanctions when it became clear - as it quickly did - that not only was the grain embargo (which wasn't a proper embargo) going to fail to hurt the Soviets but that it was going to hurt American farmers. The bottom dropped out of their market as prices tumbled in the US because of over-supply, and some historians suggest that it caused the worst agricultural depression in the US since the 1930s. It also meant that a lot of investment into grain production went to South America - I think it was Brazil which benefited most - and helped to establish meaningful competition to US farmers.

Protests had no effect on Carter - it was election year and removing the sanctions would've been an admission of yet more humiliating failure. Reagan promised to revoke the sanctions, got a lot of support from farmers and swept to power. He binned the embargo very shortly after taking office, but the damage had been done.
And China knowing that, must be panicking that a few yanks think that America is going to teach them a lesson.
Russia is the world's largest wheat exporter, by quite some margin. Has been for quite some time.
"Soviet Russia", I'm pretty sure they used to import grain from the US. They embargoed it as a response to the Soviet invasion of AFG.
Much to the chagrin of US farmers.
QED. and that's why Ukraine was historically so important to Russia, Not just because Russia wanted it but because it Europe's bread basket.
Then call it what it is, a Treaty.

Treaty, a binding formal agreement, contract, or other written instrument that establishes obligations between two or more subjects of international law (primarily states and international organizations).

A treaty is obviously a formal contract between state entities subject to International Law.
You are answering a question that wasn't asked.

The question posed was what would happen if the US decided to default on its bond obligations to China (as bond holder) alone.

I provided the answer.

Bond documentation has no provision for "rights of offset" or "netting".

It's that simple.
This would be YOU demoting International Law and International Treaty, a superior formal contract between nation states, to the status of an informal contract, inferior to individual corporate agreements that are actually subject to International Law and Treaty.

Because? You are afraid of enforcing the superior contracts with China, and obviously don't see anything beyond your limited scope of responsibility through the lens of fear.
Like it used its "clout" against Russia? Its about to spend 2 trillion of money, it can mouth of all it like China isnt going to care.

China is heading for a demographic catastrophe, it’s aging fast, very fast, how will it feed and care for 400 million pensioners in a decade?
whats that, in its headlong race to industrialise, China hasn't given a thought to building a society able to care for large numbers of elderly and vulnerable.
China’s glizty cities are all fur coat and no nickers.

to quote a wise man....”At least the Japanese has to good sense to get rich before they got old”
Last edited:


War Hero
Productive that, kill off demand then dominate the market. I bet some Oxford don thought that one up. It's Ok I'm fair to tin hatters.
Seems the tinfoil is getting wider distribution.

'China is supplying millions of masks and other desperately-needed items to struggling governments around the world. The Chinese Communist Party has flown gloves and protective clothing to Liberia, sent 100,000 test kits to the Philippines, and sent out a dozen flights carrying millions of masks and other supplies bound for the Czech Republic this week. The government has given its assistance everywhere from western Europe to the Philippines, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Iran, Iraq and several African countries.

'With this aid comes broad public statements of goodwill. In a recent message to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Chinese President Xi Jinping said that "public health crises pose a common challenge for humanity, and solidarity and co-operation are the most powerful weapon to tackle them. It is China's traditional virtue to repay goodwill with greater kindness," Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said, citing an ancient Confucian saying: "You throw a peach to me, and I give you a white jade for friendship."

'But experts say this isn’t an altruistic gesture on China’s part. Rather, it’s part of an effort to reshape the political narrative, and move the country’s tarnished image to one that’s leading the battle to bring the pandemic under control.

'Dr Malcolm Davis, Senior Analyst at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, told Beijing is “very astutely exploiting the pandemic for its own benefit. Nothing with China is pure altruism,” he said. “China is using the provision of public goods and soft power to its benefit in this crisis. The virus began in China in terms of spreading from animals to humans, and rapidly took off from there, but now that the Chinese government would appear to have it under control, it’s turning its attention to how it can exploit this situation to its benefit in terms of geopolitical and geo-strategic power. “One of the ways it can do that is by playing the good international citizen and providing all this aid to other countries who are now entering really tough times with this virus, and Beijing will reap political rewards from that.”

'The Chinese government has had an ongoing credibility problem with its own citizens since the outbreak unfolded. Authorities have been forced to monitor Chinese social media sites to remove floods of angry comments criticising the government’s handling of the outbreak, which was initially deemed delayed and reckless. Authorities actively suppressed information at the virus’ outset, and silenced those who attempted to speak out about it, prompting global condemnation of the Chinese Communist Party.

'There are two important trends playing out right now: the United States is focusing inward, and Donald Trump – Dr Davis says – is “clearly clueless about how to handle this crisis”. At the same time, he says Mr Xi wants to use the pandemic to present China as a benevolent global leader who is stepping into the leadership vacuum that the US left behind. “But at the end of the day, China will expect their assistance will become with benefits, and will expect states to pay tribute to China in the form of acquiescing to China’s interests in other areas. There are big geopolitical strings attached to the other side no matter what. If the US is severely weakened, in terms of long-term economic damage, the Chinese will be tempted to extend in that situation to their benefit. We could see China not only trying to use soft power and the perception of being a provider of economic goods to try to win global leadership, but also to resolve some issues with hard power.” In particular, he suggests all eyes should be on Taiwan once the pandemic is behind us. “I think that if the Chinese felt that the US simply wasn’t able to respond, because their economy was shattered … the Chinese might be tempted to make a move against Taiwan. If the US couldn’t come to Taiwan’s assistance, then this would further erode US credibility in the eyes of the region.”

'Julian Ku, a law professor at Hofstra University in New York, said China also hopes to benefit from a realisation in the West of how difficult it is to bring the virus under control. “The Chinese government's failures … will be less harshly viewed in light of the failures of other governments to respond effectively as well," he said.

'At the same time, China is deepening ties with countries that have been receptive to its outreach as it assumes a larger international role. It is shipping supplies to Cambodia, whose Prime Minister Hun Sen has been an outspoken supporter of Mr Xi and even visited him in Beijing last month as the outbreak raged. “It's not an accident that the heat map of where Xi Jinping is sending condolences and China is sending N95 masks overlaps pretty closely with those countries that have demonstrated a willingness to accommodate China," said Daniel Russel, a former senior US diplomat now with the Asia Society Policy Institute in New York. Opinions vary on the effectiveness of China's efforts. “It's an open question how far that's going to get … but they're clearly giving it the old-school try,” Mr Russel said. The Communist Party's propaganda, he said, has been more successful at home than abroad.

'Clive Hamilton, author of “Silent Invasion: China’s Influence in Australia," said that China has poured enormous resources into shaping the global discourse in recent years. “It would be a mistake to underestimate how effective” this “major international campaign to rewrite the history of the coronavirus" might be, he said.

'But Chu Yin, a professor of public administration at the University of International Relations in Beijing, said China lags the US and Europe in its understanding of public diplomacy and has always struggled to convert humanitarian aid into diplomatic returns. “If people really expect a big boost of China's influence through the aid, it will be difficult," he said. “In my opinion, let's just take the aid as doing a good deed, and it would help China's economy if the epidemic situation in these countries is contained."



"Soviet Russia", I'm pretty sure they used to import grain from the US. They embargoed it as a response to the Soviet invasion of AFG.
Much to the chagrin of US farmers.

They used to export liquid ammonia to the US so that it could be turned into fertiliser.
Clearly - however is there any precedent for holding a Government to account for not sharing information? Does any legal framework exist such as treaties? If not should there be one - perhaps stating the responsibility a state has to report disease outbreaks to the World Health Organisation.

The West cannot afford to act outside of the legal framework and the rule based international system.
I suppose it's too late to call America to account for Spanish Flu.
SkippedOnce says lets do nothing to change...... Fine, but we'll be back on lockdown within the next 10 years.
No, I'm saying your metric for change is ridiculous.
No, I'm saying your metric for change is ridiculous.
The further you fly, the greater the public health tax imposed.... I threw in timelines with an eye to china. But with regards Liberia, the cost to fly their and back should be beyond the average person based on latitude x tax.

Either we change, or this will happen again....

China is heading for a demographic catastrophe, it’s aging fast, very fast, how will it feed and care for 400 million pensioners in a decade?
whats that, in its headlong race to industrialise, China hasn't given a thought to building a society able to care for large numbers of elderly and vulnerable.
China’s glizty cities are all fur coat and no nickers.

to quote a wise man....”At least the Japanese has to good sense to get rich before they got old”
Yes really, its funny that people claim that other countries are heading for catastrophe but not the mighty west. The UK is projected to have a popularion consisting of 31% pensioners in ten years.
The worst I can find for China was 25% in 30 years.

Added to that, that pensioners will almost certain get less benefits in China than they would in the UK.

Luckily though the UK has pots of cash, plus a strong regime eh? We'll be better off than those poor chinese

New Posts

Latest Threads