Sadly we know this is not true. Just ask the Palestinians and Russians. Regardless of our opinions, those weapons they sent aren’t moldy and absolutely do work.

This is absolute proof that the US knows China won’t invade. If the US thought there was even a slight chance that the invasion would happen, they would have not sent garbage. Especially since they keep calling Taiwan the unsinkable carrier and how important Taiwan is to protect the first island chain. So the only 2 possibilities are that:

1. It’s not actually important to the first island chain (which we know it is, that’s why China even cares about it at all).

2. US has no concern what so ever of China invading.

So now we know it’s absolutely the US trying to start a conflict with China to invade Taiwan. They want this kind of news to leak out so China would be emboldened to attack.

*Edit: And if anyone says it’s about semiconductors, you don’t understand how semiconductor manufacturing works. Any violent conflict would pretty much result in a total destruction of the semiconductor factory.

It’s because they were never that effective before. But with the advent of drones, they have suddenly become a wildly important protection. This is cause the drones can get stuck in those slat gaps. No other weapon before had this kind of weakness. They were all basically just ballistics before drones.

Except by your own argument it really is. The UK has blocked many sites for many reasons. However, none of those reasons are for crowd control. Your example is ironically proof of the statement. This is the first time a western nation has banned media for the explicit purpose of quelling a protest and suppressing speech. Your example is a government banning a site not to quell a protest or to suppress speech, but instead because of a governmental disagreement between two nations. Now which one you think is valid for suppressing speech is a totally different question, only that they are two separate and completely different reasons.

Wow this article is a masterpiece of propaganda and disinformation. It doesn’t mention anything about the fact that some of those arrested have literal backgrounds working for the CIA. Then it claims that China is getting less foreign investment by saying the NET inflow and outflow is only 33 Billion dollars. Here’s the thing, China has been investing heavily in foreign countries like Mexico and Vietnam. So much so that Chinese factories in Mexico are shipping more to USA than China which has recently made Mexico USA’s largest exporter.

So, by obfuscating information, they’re claiming China is getting less FDI, but wait:

https://www.reuters.com/markets/german-investment-china-rises-new-record-high-2024-02-14/

Germany is having record high investments in China, what’s going on?

Well it’s easy, they’re trying to claim net not total. If I used to make 50 from inflow last year and now make 100 this year but now I’m also spending 80 my “net” went from 100 to 20. I LOST 60%!!!

Like I said, effective way to obfuscate the data. Love it

The bigger issue is they’re saying they’re decreasing support as of this year. Even if we ignore the fact that Russia will bomb those factories, factories don’t just pop up magically. Often taking years to build in the first place. If the support dries up as of this year, there’s no way Ukraine would be able to switch to domestic production.

Essentially what’s really being said is Ukraine will be stuck in a stalemate at best for this year and domestic production might support Ukraine enough for future years assuming there are no delays to factory creation. But just look at the chips act to see how well factory creation goes.

Now, I’m not saying that Bolivia won’t get indebted to China, only that this actions is literally the opposite. When you agree to bilateral trade in another country’s currency, you’re actually going to be buying that countries debt. Look at how China is one of US’s largest bond holders. The trade agreement means Bolivia will want a large reserve of Yuan which leads to Bolivia buying Chinese bonds.

That said, the next action will most likely be what you’re talking about. Much like Egypt after signing a currency swap agreement, Bolivia will likely denominate future debt in Yuan, or what we’ve been calling Panda bonds. Since you can use Yuan now for trade, it makes sense to take out debt in Yuan to fund things.

An example of this not happening however is Argentina. After agreeing to a currency swap with China to trade in Yuan, Mieli got elected and promptly ended that. No indebtedness to China at all.

You can argue that this is an indicator that Bolivia intends to get indebted to China, but this action so far is the exact opposite.