filoria

Purge has a Soviet connotation.

How about "removal of dissidents"?

The UAE now has a more progressive abortion policy than some states?

The other perspective is that defence is much easier in the information era. If the US couldn't win against Yemen, what makes you think China could win against Taiwan?

Japan Times not providing context for Japan's behaviour during WW2?

Impossible.

Improving relations between China and Russia/Eastern Europe is the solution to both countries' demographics problems.

There's two ways to look at this:

1. If Ukraine wasn't selecting flight paths that pass over civilians, this wouldn't have happened

2. If Russia wasn't intercepting these missiles, this wouldn't have happened

Both of those statements are insane, so let's talk about the real problem of cluster munitions. Clusrer munitions are an absolutely disgusting weapon, and their usage basically salts the ground indefinitely because it's guaranteed that not all clusters will detonate. Cluster munitions, when intercepted, cause mass civilian casualty events because they are inherently anti-personnel weapons. Cluster munitions should not be used in populated areas. Russia drew condemnation for this in 2022 Ukraine and earlier in Georgia. Ukraine should draw condemnation for this in 2024.

The UN Convention on Cluster Munitions happened in 2010. The primary users of cluster munitions are the US (and it's allies) and Russia (who does not export them afaik). As signatories to the CCM, EU states should condemn the usage of cluster munitions by it's allies. For obvious reasons, Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia absolutely despise cluster munitions (even today, people die because of the ones dropped during the Vietnam War).

The foundations of international law should not be flouted because of geopolitical tensions. If the US and Russia want to sow the seeds of suffering and misery, let them, but letting cluster munitions proliferate is bad for humanity.

People can say that China's been escalating the situation all they want, but the facts are that realpolitik necessitates doing something. China needs to show ASEAN two things simultaneously:

1. Aligning with China is beneficial

2. Aligning with the US is harmful

(1) Is easy: China FDI outflows to ASEAN countries have been absurd, China is dumping money to connect Vietnam to China's HSR network (at cost), improving Cambodia's role in international trade through canal construction, obscene EV deals in Indonesia/Malaysia, and more.

(2) is much more difficult. Many ASEAN countries have been trying to thread the needle between taking Chinese money and accessing US markets. The Philippines is, obviously, the most egregious player here. China is trying to show ASEAN that aligning with the US has consequences (in contrast, Duterte's Philippines had a very healthy relationship with China), especially as China looks to build a regional trade superbloc akin to NAFTA.

Car infrastructure has always been funded out of public coffers. The personal automobile is not inherently a profitable enterprise to a country. It serves primarily as a way of improving personal mobility and thus second- and third- order economic productivity.

Subways and trains are vastly more efficient systems, but unfortunately they don't have the same military logistics benefits.

In terms of actual companies, we're seeing a bit of a renaissance with EVs because EVs are inherently simple, easy to commoditize, and don't require as significant amounts of government support. China has basically cut government backing out of their EV industry, which has led to some consolidation but somehow has not ended the price war.

That's $1 million per loitering munition? Meanwhile the Lancet is $20000, the Chinese equivalent is even less, and the Israeli-made IAI Harpy (sold to China, India, etc.) is about $70000.

I'd love to be a US defence contractor.

Lmao foreign interference indeed

Source: Ukrainian Pravda

Might as well cite Russia Today given how useful that source is

What's your point? The Philippines bases their entire claim on their interpretation of UNCLOS, but flouts it at every opportunity. International law for thee but not for me.