An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile – hoping it will eat him last.
----WINSTON CHURCHILL
The President of the United States must publicly change his position on China. In the past, President Trump has described China’s President, Xi Jinping, as his “friend.” It is necessary, at this pivotal moment, for President Trump to say that President Xi is not his friend. He must admit, instead, that Xi is America’s enemy. To do otherwise is to paper over President Xi’s many hostile actions, his preparations for war, and his policy of blaming America for the pandemic.
It is time for the President of the United States to face the truth — and tell the truth — about Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party. It is time to return enmity for enmity, to reciprocate communist China’s hostility, and prepare to repel their aggression. For they have used our openness and generosity against us. They have taken our kindness for weakness. They have practiced treachery on our good faith, and they have made war on our economy. We can no longer refer to communists as “friends.” They are enemies,
We must hear the truth from our president about communist China’s fifth column in the United States. This truth must not be softened, or watered down with the usual stupidities about free trade and peace; domestic concord or racial tolerance. We are in a life-or-death situation now. Enemy propaganda and enemy propagandists should be identified and ostracized. We cannot allow communist agents of influence to turn the tables, blame America, condemn patriotism, and open the country to enemy attack.
Regarding those who wish to return the country to economic dependence on China: Communist regimes will always use trade as weapon. They will corrupt everyone and everything they touch — businessmen and politicians, sports stars and Hollywood producers. To negotiate with communist China is a fool’s errand. A treaty, for them, is like a pie crust — meant to be broken. The history of communism is long, and the criminal nature of all communist regimes cannot be denied. There is no excuse for having relations with them. To make partners of them is to become their partner in crime.
President Xi made a conscious decision to allow the CCP virus to incubate in Wuhan until the Chinese New Year — the biggest calendar day of outgoing travel from China. Reports about the outbreak in China are not ambiguous in this regard.
What happened in Wuhan was directed — every step of the way — from the office of President Xi. Party officials were forced to allow crowds to congregate during the New Year holiday in Wuhan. They were compelled by Beijing to host 40,000 people at the city potluck, even though an infectious form of viral pneumonia was spreading through the city. Xi’s intentions can be read through dozens of news reports and official edicts. Xi only allowed Wuhan to fight the pandemic after the city’s holiday visitors had returned abroad — carrying the infection to Europe, Australia and North America.
The decisions made by the Chines leaders, in this regard, were not improvised. Chinese strategic decisions are carefully thought out in advance. Years of study had already gone into bat viruses at the Wuhan BSL-4 virology lab. In fact, the placement of the BSL-4 facility in Wuhan defies logic — unless we recognize Beijing’s remarkable foresight.
In order to launch a biological attack, China would need an alibi to avoid retaliation. The alibi would have two sides: one alibi would focus blame on America, the other would mask Xi’s malevolent intentions.
The two-sided alibi would, by necessity, have the following features: (1) To forestall retaliation against China, evidence would be planted regarding safety issues and a leak at a Chinese virology lab; (2) to silence criticism from the Chinese public, Communist Party officials would claim the CIA or U.S. military planted the virus as part of an attack on the Chinese people.
To make these parallel alibis deployable at the same time, Chinese planners would first have considered which Chinese city an enemy would target in a biological war. As the central hub of China’s rail and waterway communications, Wuhan would be the logical choice. Therefore the Chinese planners would have built their strategy around a Wuhan infection scenario. To make this scenario compatible with the “leaky lab” alibi, China’s strategist would also have to place their BSL-4 facility in Wuhan, instead of a more remote location in the Gobi Desert.
It is impractical to carry on a biological war without giving the first iteration of the virus to your own people. Because an alibi is paramount, Wuhan had to become the center of the pandemic. Chinese people would be the first to suffer. Therefore, the initial iteration of the weapon would be designed according to the principles of asymmetric warfare, with the following stipulation: First, the weapon would strategically benefit China; second, it would harm the West.
Consider the virus’s effects. It typically kills the elderly and infirm. From a Darwinian standpoint, the virus favors survival of the fittest. For An overpopulated country like China, such a viral outbreak is useful for thinning the herd. Given a half century under China’s “one child policy,” that herd is not only too large, but too old. Meanwhile, America and the West are irrevocably committed to protecting the weakest and least fit members of society. The West could be counted on to expend untold trillions to stop the virus. China would suffer a brief shock, of course, and economic losses, but these losses would be made up in the end. China would be ordered back to work — with countless elderly citizens sealed alive in body bags for cremation.[see next post]
Source link:
https://jrnyquist.blog/2020/04/17/what-president-trump-must-do-to-stop-chinas-invasion/#more-1978
----WINSTON CHURCHILL
The President of the United States must publicly change his position on China. In the past, President Trump has described China’s President, Xi Jinping, as his “friend.” It is necessary, at this pivotal moment, for President Trump to say that President Xi is not his friend. He must admit, instead, that Xi is America’s enemy. To do otherwise is to paper over President Xi’s many hostile actions, his preparations for war, and his policy of blaming America for the pandemic.
It is time for the President of the United States to face the truth — and tell the truth — about Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party. It is time to return enmity for enmity, to reciprocate communist China’s hostility, and prepare to repel their aggression. For they have used our openness and generosity against us. They have taken our kindness for weakness. They have practiced treachery on our good faith, and they have made war on our economy. We can no longer refer to communists as “friends.” They are enemies,
We must hear the truth from our president about communist China’s fifth column in the United States. This truth must not be softened, or watered down with the usual stupidities about free trade and peace; domestic concord or racial tolerance. We are in a life-or-death situation now. Enemy propaganda and enemy propagandists should be identified and ostracized. We cannot allow communist agents of influence to turn the tables, blame America, condemn patriotism, and open the country to enemy attack.
Regarding those who wish to return the country to economic dependence on China: Communist regimes will always use trade as weapon. They will corrupt everyone and everything they touch — businessmen and politicians, sports stars and Hollywood producers. To negotiate with communist China is a fool’s errand. A treaty, for them, is like a pie crust — meant to be broken. The history of communism is long, and the criminal nature of all communist regimes cannot be denied. There is no excuse for having relations with them. To make partners of them is to become their partner in crime.
President Xi made a conscious decision to allow the CCP virus to incubate in Wuhan until the Chinese New Year — the biggest calendar day of outgoing travel from China. Reports about the outbreak in China are not ambiguous in this regard.
What happened in Wuhan was directed — every step of the way — from the office of President Xi. Party officials were forced to allow crowds to congregate during the New Year holiday in Wuhan. They were compelled by Beijing to host 40,000 people at the city potluck, even though an infectious form of viral pneumonia was spreading through the city. Xi’s intentions can be read through dozens of news reports and official edicts. Xi only allowed Wuhan to fight the pandemic after the city’s holiday visitors had returned abroad — carrying the infection to Europe, Australia and North America.
The decisions made by the Chines leaders, in this regard, were not improvised. Chinese strategic decisions are carefully thought out in advance. Years of study had already gone into bat viruses at the Wuhan BSL-4 virology lab. In fact, the placement of the BSL-4 facility in Wuhan defies logic — unless we recognize Beijing’s remarkable foresight.
In order to launch a biological attack, China would need an alibi to avoid retaliation. The alibi would have two sides: one alibi would focus blame on America, the other would mask Xi’s malevolent intentions.
The two-sided alibi would, by necessity, have the following features: (1) To forestall retaliation against China, evidence would be planted regarding safety issues and a leak at a Chinese virology lab; (2) to silence criticism from the Chinese public, Communist Party officials would claim the CIA or U.S. military planted the virus as part of an attack on the Chinese people.
To make these parallel alibis deployable at the same time, Chinese planners would first have considered which Chinese city an enemy would target in a biological war. As the central hub of China’s rail and waterway communications, Wuhan would be the logical choice. Therefore the Chinese planners would have built their strategy around a Wuhan infection scenario. To make this scenario compatible with the “leaky lab” alibi, China’s strategist would also have to place their BSL-4 facility in Wuhan, instead of a more remote location in the Gobi Desert.
It is impractical to carry on a biological war without giving the first iteration of the virus to your own people. Because an alibi is paramount, Wuhan had to become the center of the pandemic. Chinese people would be the first to suffer. Therefore, the initial iteration of the weapon would be designed according to the principles of asymmetric warfare, with the following stipulation: First, the weapon would strategically benefit China; second, it would harm the West.
Consider the virus’s effects. It typically kills the elderly and infirm. From a Darwinian standpoint, the virus favors survival of the fittest. For An overpopulated country like China, such a viral outbreak is useful for thinning the herd. Given a half century under China’s “one child policy,” that herd is not only too large, but too old. Meanwhile, America and the West are irrevocably committed to protecting the weakest and least fit members of society. The West could be counted on to expend untold trillions to stop the virus. China would suffer a brief shock, of course, and economic losses, but these losses would be made up in the end. China would be ordered back to work — with countless elderly citizens sealed alive in body bags for cremation.[see next post]
Source link:
https://jrnyquist.blog/2020/04/17/what-president-trump-must-do-to-stop-chinas-invasion/#more-1978