(06-29-2020, 10:42 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-29-2020, 09:58 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: ...  I count the progressive era as lasting from FDR to LBJ.  The conservative era runs from Nixon to hopefully Trump.  LBJ by going after the black vote ended the time that America was Great.

Hopefully, the current rejection of racist violent policing marks a time where this might turn around.

I actually push the Progressive era through Carter, but that's it!  Nixon was a scumbag, but he created the Environmental Protection Agency and opened the door to China.  That has to count for something. Carter made the tragic error of being in the job at the wrong point in history.

(06-29-2020, 05:39 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(06-29-2020, 10:42 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-29-2020, 09:58 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: ...  I count the progressive era as lasting from FDR to LBJ.  The conservative era runs from Nixon to hopefully Trump.  LBJ by going after the black vote ended the time that America was Great.

Hopefully, the current rejection of racist violent policing marks a time where this might turn around.

I actually push the Progressive era through Carter, but that's it!  Nixon was a scumbag, but he created the Environmental Protection Agency and opened the door to China.  That has to count for something. Carter made the tragic error of being in the job at the wrong point in history.

The disasters, in terms of Watergate and the Fall of Saigon, started on Nixon's watch.  America failing started a bit earlier.  Still, it seems traditional that everything can be argued about here.

(06-30-2020, 08:21 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:

(06-29-2020, 05:39 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(06-29-2020, 10:42 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(06-29-2020, 09:58 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: ...  I count the progressive era as lasting from FDR to LBJ.  The conservative era runs from Nixon to hopefully Trump.  LBJ by going after the black vote ended the time that America was Great.

Hopefully, the current rejection of racist violent policing marks a time where this might turn around.

I actually push the Progressive era through Carter, but that's it!  Nixon was a scumbag, but he created the Environmental Protection Agency and opened the door to China.  That has to count for something. Carter made the tragic error of being in the job at the wrong point in history.

The disasters, in terms of Watergate and the Fall of Saigon, started on Nixon's watch.  America failing started a bit earlier.  Still, it seems traditional that everything can be argued about here.

I'd say the ongoing collapse [a process, not an event] started in 1973 with the oil shock, add 1979, the de-industrialization from the mid 1970's through the 1980's. The 1980's-2008 was a fake debt fueled boom. The DNC forsook it's FDR roots with Clinton and joined the Neoliberal duopoly. This undermined what safety nets we have.  Next is the deficient provision of public goods which has now led to the US utterly exposed to Covid-19, where hey, we're number 1.  USA, USA! Number 1 at last in something. Covid-19 cases, woo-hoo. And for a nice big fat cherry on top, citizens united which legalized bribery.

• China passes Hong Kong Security Law, arrests hundreds of peaceful protesters
  
• Terms of the Hong Kong National Security Law
  
• Ladakh: India - China - Pakistan military buildup continues
  

• China is massing troops in Galwan Valley, which China is
  claiming as its sovereign territory for the first time. ( "25-Jun-20 World View -- Both India and China reinforce armies in Ladakh, as China makes new claim"
  )
  
  
• India is sending a dozen steel patrol boats to Ladakh’s Pangong
  Tso lake, to counter the Chinese Army lake fleet.
  
  
• Pakistan has moved almost 20,000 troops into Ladakh, to match
  Chinese deployments. India is preparing for a two-front war
  with Pakistan and China.
  
  
• India will deploy Barak-8 medium-range surface-to-air missile
  systems, on loan from Israel.

• National security law: day of defiance as protests break out in Hong Kong, about 370 arrested (South China Morning Post, Hong Kong, 2-Jul-2020)
  
• National Security Law / Hong Kong: First arrests under 'anti-protest' law as handover marked (BBC, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• First arrests in HK under just-passed national security law (Business Times, Singapore, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• China Versus the World -- An Emboldened Beijing Seeks to Consolidate Its Power (DerSpiegel, 24-Jun-2020)
  
• Hong Kong security law: What is it and is it worrying? (BBC, 30-Jun-2020)
  
• Translation - Hong Kong National Security Law (Xinhua, DOC file, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• Scoop: U.S. seizes $800,000 shipment of Xinjiang products made with human hair (Axios, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• 5 Takeaways From China's Hong Kong National Security Law (NPR, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• Pakistani troop movement in Ladakh, sources say China in talks with Pak terror groups (India Today, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• India sending high-powered boats to match heavier Chinese vessels while patrolling Ladakh lake (Hindustan Times, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• India to ban Chinese companies from highway projects, says Nitin Gadkari (Hindustan Times, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• India to deploy Barak-8 Air Defence System in Ladakh against China (Defence Aviation Post, India, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• Calls to Ban Everything Chinese Gain Momentum in India Following Ladakh Standoff (Sputnik News, Moscow, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• Pakistan Deploys Additional 20,000 Soldiers In North Ladakh On China’s Behest – Reports (Eurasian Times, 1-Jul-2020)

• US sanctions Hong Kong as activists protest 'March of the Volunteers' (28-May-2020)
  
  
• Minister suggests Japan will defend Taiwan against military invasion by China (24-May-2020)
  
  
• China to pass law threatening full control of Hong Kong (22-May-2020)
  
  
• Hong Kong holds massive peaceful pro-democracy demonstration (09-Dec-2019)
  
  
• Both India and China reinforce armies in Ladakh, as China makes new claim (25-Jun-2020)
  
  
• Nationwide protests in India demand revenge against China (19-Jun-2020)
  
  
• China and India mobilize thousands of troops along border in Ladakh (13-Jun-2020)
  
  
• Generational Theory: Is nuclear war with China inevitable? (17-May-2020)
  

(07-01-2020, 09:01 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: As I've written in the past, the Ladakh military clash is remarkably similar to the military clash between Japanese and Chinese soldiers in 1937 in the Marco Polo Bridge Incident.  The clash was resolved quickly, but both sides brought in reinforcements.  Within a month there was full-scale war, leading to the Japanese "Rape of Nanking" shortly thereafter.

With both sides bringing reinforcements into Ladakh, the situation is very similar.

Quote:> "Your bravery and your dedication to safeguard mother
> India’s honour is not comparable. Your endurance is not inferior
> to anyone in the world. No one in the world can compete with the
> tough situations and the heights you embrace while serving mother
> India. Your courage is taller than the heights you are deployed
> in. Your resolve is stronger than the valleys you walk every day
> and your arms are as strong as the rocks that surround you. The
> strength of your will is indomitable like the mountains around
> you. I can feel it and see it today, as I am amongst you. ...

> India is increasing its strength in all three realms of water, air
> and land guided by the principle of the wellbeing of the entire
> mankind. When India is developing modern weaponry and bringing the
> latest technology for its armed forces, then the message behind is
> driven by the well being of humanity. ...

> Age of expansionism is over, now, is the age of development. The
> policy of development is the foundation of mankind and is the only
> policy relevant today. History has witnessed that the expansionist
> policy has hurt humanity the most. Expansionist policy has always
> threatened world peace. History has witnessed that such forces
> have either lost or were forced to turn back. This is what the
> world has experienced so far and it has once again made up its
> mind against the policy of expansion."

> https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/top-10-quotes-from-pm-modi-s-address-to-soldiers-of-indian-army-in-ladakh/story-rxh3RmtJAG7jpDD2CSnaKO.html

Quote:> "China's 21 border disputes

> Xi Jinping’s China has territorial disputes with 20 more
> countries, not just India over Ladakh

> President Donald Trump on Thursday [1]waded right in the middle of
> India’s dispute with China, asserting that Beijing’s aggressive
> stance in Ladakh fits with the larger pattern of Chinese
> aggression in other parts of the world. President Trump’s office
> did not elaborate on China’s aggression elsewhere but is seen as a
> clear reference to Beijing’s efforts to enlarge its position on
> border disputes. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had recently
> called it China’s “rogue attitude” as he announced the movement of
> US supercarriers in the Indo Pacific region to counter China’s
> aggressive posture.

> According to Beijing watchers, China has traditionally suffered
> from xenophobia against foreigners. The Middle Kingdom’s fears
> were exacerbated in the past two centuries as a result of which
> China believes that it is the only civilizational power in the
> world and the rest are either tributary states or barbarians.

> China has had territorial disputes with 21 neighbours including
> India over its claims on land and sea. Here is a complete list of
> its disputes.

> Brunei

> China claims the southern part of the Spratly Islands
> chain. Brunei, on the other hand, claims part of South China Sea
> nearest to it as part of its continental shelf and Exclusive
> Economic Zone

> Philippines

> China and Philippines disagree over parts of the South China Sea
> including the Spratly Islands. Philippines took the dispute to the
> International Court of Justice where they won the case but the
> Chinese side did not abide by the order of the ICJ. Tensions have
> continued between the two countries despite economic incentives
> offered by China.

> Indonesia

> China’s nine-dash line overlaps the Natuna Sea/Exclusive Economic
> Zone of Indonesia leading to disputes. China claims fishing rights
> in waters near the islands. Indonesia government argues that
> China’s claims are not recognised under the 1982 United Nations
> Convention on the Law of the Sea. Indonesia irked China in July
> 2017 when it renamed parts of the South China Sea as North Natuna
> Sea to underscore its claim.

> Malaysia

> China’s dispute with Malaysia also revolves around parts of the
> South China Sea, particularly the Spratly Islands. Its claims
> cover only islands included in its Exclusive Economic Zone of 200
> miles as defined by the UN Convention on the Law of the
> Sea. Malaysia has a military presence on three such islands that
> it considers to be part of the continental shelf.

> Singapore

> Singapore is not a claimant state in the South China Sea disputes
> but is closely aligned to the United States and allows the
> presence of US naval forces in Singaporean waters. It does not
> want to antagonise China by openly taking sides though it does
> advocate freedom of navigation and resolution of all disputes in
> line with the UN Convention of Law of the Seas.

> Laos

> China claims large areas of Laos on historical precedent of
> China’s Yuan Dynasty during 1271-1368

> Cambodia

> China has, on occasions, claimed part of the country on historical
> precedent (China’s Ming dynasty 1368-1644)

> Thailand

> Thailand opposes China’s dredging on the Mekong River since 2001
> for large ships to carry goods from its landlocked Yunnan province
> to ports in Thailand, Laos and remaining southeast Asia. China has
> also built hydropower dams on the main stream of the Mekong River,
> altering the natural flood-drought cycle, affecting ecosystems as
> well as economies of countries on the lower Mekong River.

> The Thai Cabinet scrapped a Chinese-led dredging project in
> February 2020 to blast rapids on the Mekong river. This had
> already led to fall in water levels and fers that it would lead to
> drought and affect 6 million people in Myanmar, Thailand, Laos,
> Cambodia and Vietnam

> Japan

> Japan’s dispute with China centers around South China Sea,
> particularly Senkaku Islands, Ryukyu Islands and the overlapping
> Air Defence Identification Zone and Exclusive Economic Zone in the
> East China Sea

> Vietnam

> Vietnam, which fought a bloody war with China in 1979 when Beijing
> tried to teach its former ally a lesson, has stood its ground on
> its territorial claims over parts of the South China Sea, and the
> Macclesfield Bank, Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands. Last
> month, a Chinese ship rammed a Vietnamese fishing boat operating
> in the Paracel Islands that was seen as an effort by Beijing to
> flex muscles to enforce a unilateral fishing ban in parts of the
> South China Sea against vessels from another nation.

> India

> China occupies 38,000 sq km Indian territory in the Aksai Chin
> region apart from staking claim on Arunachal Pradesh and
> Ladakh. It was this expansionist policy that led to the ongoing
> standoff between the Indian Army and the Chinese PLA that
> escalated into a violent scrap in Ladakh’s Galwan valley. Another
> 5,163 sq km of Shaksgam valley was illegally ceded by Pakistan to
> China in 1963. Hence, the total Indian territory occupied by China
> is over 43 ,000 sq km.

> Nepal

> Nepal and China have pending border issues over three boundary
> pillars in Dolakha and two in the vicinity of Mt Everest. There
> have, however, been reports that China has illegally occupied
> strategic land at 12 places across Nepal. China has also claimed
> part of Nepal dating back to the Sino-Nepalese war in 1788-1792,
> claiming that some parts of Nepal are part of Tibet and therefore,
> part of China.

> Taiwan

> China claims all of Taiwan but particular disputes are
> Macclesfield Bank, Paracel Islands Scarborough Shoal, part of
> South China Sea and the Spratly Islands. The Paracel Islands, also
> called Xisha Islands in zvietnamese, is a group of islands in the
> South China Sea whose sovereignty is disputed.

> North Korea

> The two countries have a continuing dispute over Mount Paektu and
> Yalu and Tuman rivers. China has also claimed Baekhu Mountain and
> Jiandao. Beijing has, on occasions, claimed all of North Korea on
> historical grounds (Yuan Dynasty 1271-1368)

> South Korea

> South Korea and China have an overlapping Air Defence
> Identification Zone and a continuing Exclusive Economic Zone
> dispute over Leodo (Socotra Rock) in the East China Sea. China has
> also, on occasions, claimed entire South Korea on historical
> grounds (Yuan Dynasty 1271-1368)

> Mongolia

> China and Mongolia have settled their boundary dispute but China
> has claimed all of Mongolia on historical precedent (Yuan Dynasty
> 1271-1368).

> Bhutan

> Bhutanese enclaves in Tibet, namely Cherkip, Gompa, Dho, Dungmar,
> Gesur, Gezon, Itse Gompa, Khochar, Nyanri, Ringung, Sanmar,
> Tarchen and Zuthulphuk. Bhutan has lost a substantial chunk of
> area under dispute including the Kula Kangri peak to slow
> encroachments by China. Beijing claims Kula Kangri and
> mountainous areas to the west of this peak in addition to the
> western Haa district of Bhutan.

> Tajikistan

> The two sides have a bilateral dispute dating back to 1884 when a
> border demarcation agreement between the Qing Dynasty and Tsarist
> Russia left large segments of the frontier in the
> sparsely-populated eastern Pamirs without a clear definition.

> The Chinese claims are based on historical precedent (Qing Dynasty
> 1644-1912).

> In 1991, Tajikistan inherited from the Soviet Union three disputed
> border segments constituting about 28,000 sq km which China and
> the Soviet Union had been unable to resolve.

> In 1999, Tajikistan and China signed a border demarcation
> agreement defining the border in two of the three segments. Under
> this deal, Tajikistan ceded about 200 sw km lands to China. In
> 2002, Tajikistan agreed to cede 1,122 sq km or about four percent
> of the territory that Beijing had claimed. China has, in all,
> settled for 3.5 per cent of the claimed territory.

> Kazakhstan

> China has laid claim to a territory in Kazakhstan stretching from
> Semirechie to Lake Balkhash covering 34,000 sq km. In May 2020, a
> Chinese website ‘Sohu.com’ published an article claiming that
> Kazakhstan is located on territories that historically belong to
> China.

> China has settled for 22 per cent of its claim over Kazakh
> territory. Despite a border demarcation treaty with China in 1994
> and claim by Kazakh state media that the Kazakhstan government had
> succeeded in retaining 56.9 percent of the disputed territory,
> critics had opined that the remaining 43.1 per cent of the land
> also belonged to Kazakhstan for which a new deal should be signed.

> Kyrgyzstan

> China lays claim to the whole of Kyrgyz territory. In May 2020,
> Chinese website tutiao.com published an article on such a claim
> and argued that under the Han Dynasty, the entire Kyrgyz territory
> was part of the Chinese mainland before the Russian empire
> captured it.

> Chia has settled for 32 percent of its claim over Kyrgyz
> territory. Under the 1999 agreement, Kyrgyzstan handed over 1,250
> sq km to China.

> Russia

> Despite signing bilateral agreements in 1991 and 1994 to delimit
> the estern and wester section of the Russia-China border, a few
> sectors remain unresolved. There are 160,000 sq km still
> unilaterally claimed by China despite signing several agreements.

> In October 2004, the 4,300 sq border was finally demarcated in its
> entirety, thus resolving a 300-year-old territorial dispute.

> In 2005, the Russian Parliament ratified the agreement in 2008, a
> part of the Abagaitu Islet, the entire Tarabarov Bolshoi Ussuriysk
> Island and some adjacent river islets were handed over to China."

> https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/donald-trump-spotted-a-pattern-in-china-s-standoff-with-india-here-are-21-reasons/story-nJS76GTlHlssm1tB9q5NAN.html

• Gleeful China wins big Hong Kong victory at UN Human Rights Council
  
• Rogue's gallery of international criminals support China
  
• Most Western countries condemn China's human rights record
  
• India's list of China's border disagreements
  

• Hong Kong / UNHCR / Landslide support for HK law at UNHRC (Global Times, Beijing, 1-Jul-2020)
  
• The 53 countries supporting China's crackdown on Hong Kong (Axios, 3-Jul-2020)
  
• China threat: Italy and Spain avoid criticising Beijing in Hong Kong vote 'Pretty damning' (Daily Express, London, 4-Jul-2020)
  
• Letters: China’s treatment of Hong Kong shows that it is not to be trusted (Daily Telegraph, London, 4-Jul-2020)
  
• India uses Hong Kong to land diplomatic punch on China (Times of India, 4-Jul-2020)
  
• China's 21 border disputes / Trump spotted a pattern in China’s standoff with India. Here are 21 reasons (Hindustan Times, 3-Jul-2020)
  
• Top 10 quotes from PM Modi’s address to soldiers of Indian Army in Ladakh (Hindustan Times, 3-Jul-2020)

• China passes Hong Kong Security Law, arrests hundreds of peaceful protesters (02-Jul-2020)
  
  
• Both India and China reinforce armies in Ladakh, as China makes new claim (25-Jun-2020)
  
  
• Nationwide protests in India demand revenge against China (19-Jun-2020)
  
  
• Generational Theory: Is nuclear war with China inevitable? (17-May-2020)
  

(11-22-2018, 02:21 PM)Tim Randal Walker Wrote: Other classifications for old age are similar, but begin the Old-Old phase at 85. I think this is probably more accurate than the distinctions that I posted earlier. Middle-Old would be divided in two parts by the fragility barrier-late seventies, and the early eighties. Past the fragility barrier one is living on borrowed time.

Prower2a's comments would seem to fit this, with 84 being the usual cut off point for participation in public life. The fields he mentioned as exceptions, such as politics or the arts, may be not require that much physical prowess. If memory serves me right, he once mentioned journalism as another exception.

Of course, the Old-old phase suggests a time scale similar to what S & H described. A long ago event may not have disappeared from living memory, but those memories may have little or no influence on public reactions to present day events.

(07-06-2020, 01:04 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: There is nothing like shared danger to push the homogenization of a culture. We are not there yet... two opposing sides still think that their very different views of the American future will win, prevailing over the other side due to their rightness.

• Learning to live with Wuhan Coronavirus
  
• Should you wear a face mask?
  
• The Chinese Communist Party and Wuhan Coronavirus
  

• The Threat Posed by the Chinese Government and the Chinese Communist Party to the Economic and National Security of the United States (FBI, 7-Jul-2020)

• Gleeful China wins big Hong Kong victory at UN Human Rights Council (05-Jul-2020)
  
  
• CNBC's Jim Cramer: Hostility to China grows in America (27-Apr-2020)
  
  
• Today's Wuhan Coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic vs 1918 Spanish Flu (22-Mar-2020)
  

mooreupp Wrote:> On the 3%, I think that will prove to be a underestimation. When
> they did random antibody tests in different places in the US and
> elsewhere in April and May, we were getting at least 10x as many
> people infected as official totals everywhere, sometimes far more.
> I suspect that has probably decreased some with additional
> testing, but is also probably far higher in areas of the world
> where testing is rare. The CDC did come on board with saying 10x
> as many (although it didn't exactly make big news).
> https://usa.greekreporter.com/2020/06/27/up-to-300-million-people-may-be-infected-by-covid-19-stanford-guru-john-ioannidis-says/

> The US is a bit shy of 3 million confirmed cases. That 10x number
> if it holds would put us close to 30 million already infected in
> America which is almost a 1/10 the population. That's mostly good
> news as it means the mortality rate on this is also a fraction of
> advertised and we are further along on this than most suspect
> (although we will probably never actually get rid of this).

> Further, there is actually a bit more good news in the numbers.
> We've had evidence people have cross-immunity from other diseases
> in this (other coronaviruses or something that helps out). I've
> seen suggestions from people I trust with numbers that it seems to
> be holding up near half the population (whether that is permanent
> protection or short term I do not know though). Given the R0 is
> estimated around a 3.0 in a completely vulnerable population, we
> need around 2/3 the population to be immune for herd immunity.
> Well if 1/2 the population already is (at least short term), then
> we only need around 17% of the population to get it (plus or minus
> depending on location) to get herd immunity.

> That makes sense with other numbers we've seen. The hard hit
> areas seem to be topping out at 20% and then the spread slows. My
> personal guess is New York City is already at herd immunity.
> Decreased social distancing there would create a spike in cases,
> but it would be impossible to get the runaway one like
> before.

(07-08-2020, 12:57 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Trump is also pushing for therapeutics or a vaccine.  About all that can save him if the polls are correct is hitting a home run before the election comes around.  Of course, every Pharma company in the world is trying to hit a home run.

I agree that tension has gone up all around with respect to China, and this seems to have effected even the leaders of the CCP, but I am not seeing how they are planning for a profit yet.  They are still in the ‘When in trouble or in doubt, run and circles scream and shout” phase.  They are surrounded by trouble spots with no good one to hit.  

I am reminded of General Grant.  “Oh, I am heartily tired of hearing about what Lee is going to do. Some of you always seem to think he is suddenly going to turn a double somersault, and land in our rear and on both of our flanks at the same time. Go back to your command, and try to think what we are going to do ourselves, instead of what Lee is going to do.”

(07-09-2020, 09:41 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: It is almost too late for clinical trials to be published for any vaccine before the election.

(07-10-2020, 01:17 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(07-09-2020, 09:41 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: It is almost too late for clinical trials to be published for any vaccine before the election.

Yes, but it is always possible to distract from your mistakes handling COVID 19.  Just make every one of your borders hot.  The best way to cover weakness is to pretend to be strong.

(07-10-2020, 01:17 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(07-09-2020, 09:41 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: It is almost too late for clinical trials to be published for any vaccine before the election.

Yes, but it is always possible to distract from your mistakes handling COVID 19.  Just make every one of your borders hot.  The best way to cover weakness is to pretend to be strong.

(07-11-2020, 07:03 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(07-10-2020, 01:17 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(07-09-2020, 09:41 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: It is almost too late for clinical trials to be published for any vaccine before the election.

Yes, but it is always possible to distract from your mistakes handling COVID 19.  Just make every one of your borders hot.  The best way to cover weakness is to pretend to be strong.

Clinical trials are not that important to the general public.  The Trumpists know that, so they merely picked a few potential winners and pre-purchased millions of doses hoping for the best.  Of course, they ignored the 'hoping' part when they announced it.

The cynic in me would shout: Solyndra.   That was a similar but much less excessive attempt at a solution (solar energy in that case).  The GOPpers screamed bloody murder. They should be reminded of that.