[GlickWick]

My argument is that a major world power is pushing towards global conflict by simultaneously funding the conquest of Ukraine while building its own invasion fleet for Taiwan. Allowing them to also destabilize us internally is not exactly a good idea.

[mikem170]

> funding the conquest of Ukraine

It is well known that China is still engaged in trade with Russia- oil and gold going one way, drones and weapon components going the other.

But you said funding, and I assume you meant things like grants or loans. Do you have any sources for that? I could only find one that was attributed to indirect open source intelligence, nothing specific.

[GlickWick]

Trade is funding.

[mikem170]

Russia has been trading with a number of countries[0]. Mostly China, but also significantly with India, Turkey and the EU, and in much lesser amounts with 30+ other countries, including the US, the UK, UAE, Brazil, Japan, South Korea, etc.

I don't know if the above data helps to make your original point or not. Would you say that all those countries are funding the Russian war against Ukraine? Perhaps they do so for a combination of various reasons - energy and food needs, business profits, other self-interests, don't care, etc.

Wouldn't a country pushing for global conflict - really global - sow disorder by doing things like: break up alliances, threaten annexations, back illiberal poitical movements, disrupt shipping, disrupt free trade, disrupt energy supplies, start and foment regional wars, etc? Given that all countries tend to do things like this to one extent or another, how many of these things has China done, and how does that compare to other similarly capable countries?

I would say that China is asserting itself as a regional power, like with a navy that threatens Taiwan but can't project power much further than that, wouldn't turn into a global conflict unless other global powers feel so threatened they make it one. Maybe just a play on fear, for power and profit. War-mongering. Wouldn't be the first time.

EDIT: And look at how China has been "funded" China (via trade) over the last three decades... ironic!

[0] https://www.bruegel.org/dataset/russian-foreign-trade-tracke... (summary imports/exports by country in stacked graphs at bottom of page)

[kaibee]

> Allowing them to also destabilize us internally is not exactly a good idea.

The US destablized itself internally. China did not force the US to export its manufacturing base. It did not force the US to invade Iraq. It did not force the US to create a housing market bubble. It did not force the US to create massive income and wealth inequality. It did not force the US to supress transitioning away from oil towards cheap renewables. It did not force the US start a global oil shortage by invading Iran.

That having found itself at the tail of 25 years of poor financial planning, the US decided to go double-or-nothing by betting on LLMs to bail out the economy... does not mean that China has to fold its hand.

[SecretDreams]

I thought you were talking about the US for a minute...

[GlickWick]

The US is building a Taiwan invasion fleet?

[tsimionescu]

No, the US is actively invading Iran, by ship and by air. And they've invaded Venezuela. And they're actively supporting Israel's invasion of Lebanon and Gaza. And they're bombing a few more countries now and then, especially in Africa.

China is not actively involved in any war at all. They may be supporting Russia with resources, but it's nowhere near the level of material and diplomatic support that the USA is providing to Israel's genocide and war of aggression on Lebanon.

[solumunus]

How is it destabilising? Do you purely mean China have exposed ill thought out investments? That’s capitalism my guy. The market is working as intended.

When the investments fail there will be volatility but it’s hardly existential for the US. Open models are good for the whole world, I would argue it’s a net positive for individuals.