39 Replies to “Things You’ll Never See On The Xi-B-C”

      1. My brother was offered about $50 for a bear’s gall bladder a few years ago. The purchaser said he could sell them to China or Japan for three times that.
        As our black bear populations is about 120,000 to 160,000 we can spare a few , but the authorities strictly forbid selling bear parts.

        They rip us off every year with their LEH scam, but I guess they don’t like it when we peasants make a few bucks off hunting.

        Fortunately, the “retarded” Xi is no match for our Justin in the political arena.

  3. Well … the ChiComs DO have a Billion or more peasants to still bring into the 20th Century. Me? I am sooooooo proud that my tax dollars are giving electricity to pig farmers in Nangdingdong Province. Transferring my wealth helps cut the toxicity of my whiteness … Right?

  4. Xi’s message to the rest of the world and their global governance poseurs: “GFY, we’ll be in charge soon enough”. And, “the Spawn will be my personal cabin boy”.

    1. I assume this is a veiled reference to that famous ditty of yesteryear, “The cabin boy,the cabin boy,the dirty little nipper……………….” ( I believe this was one chorus from our former national anthem,”The North Atlantic Squadron”)

      I don’t think Justin would DO that to his hero.

      1. I’m familiar with that ditty but agree that the Spawn would only utilize the finest of ChiCom lubricants of Xi’s choice.

        When you have a coach named Butts, well……….

  5. And according to the Paris Accord they do not have to even begin reducing their GHG emissions (ha,ha,ha,ha,ha) until 2030 – when they will be about 300% higher than they are today.

    At that point they wont have to actually reduce them – only reduce the level of increase.

    As such the output will continue to increase – just a bit more slowly.

  6. China and India were given carte blanche to pollute their asses off till 2030 before they even think about making adjustments to their emissions or in India’s case when they receive 2.5 trillion in aid.
    In the meantime…Western nations have to kick in trillions and provide the technological means to help them with CO2 mitigation while simultaneously tanking our own economies. How nice.

    No wonder Trump wanted out. We are so Effed.

      1. The ABC* is real, and deadly. I’m tired of breathing it over here on the West Coast. It drifts over here and destroys the air quality CA has created from all our Tesla driving.

        *Asian Brown Cloud

  8. A fairly new coal operation at Hinton has come to a skidding halt because of a “review” by the federal government.
    3 native bands are now objecting to its operations now (even though it’s been under development and operating for about 3 years) even though the band closest to it is in favour of it.
    I’d bet this will be a play by Chinapotato to see China take ownership of this mine.

  10. Correction…it’s the Alberta E Regulators that have stopped operations not the feds.
    Oh …perhaps they are one and the same.
    Saving fish not jobs is the focus.

  11. Of course they are.

    The Chinese Communist Party is determined to conquer the planet before the hundredth anniversary of the Revolution in 2049. That requires all the cheap fossil fuels they can get their blood-stained hands on.

    The climate change hysteria, bankrolled by Red China and their global corporate clientele, was designed to keep the price of coal, oil and gas as low as possible, divert as much as possible to fuel rapid Chinese development, and ensure that western development slowed or stopped long enough for China to overtake the west.

    In general, only communist countries have ever come close to realizing the nightmares of an irredeemably poisoned planet the greenies use to scare us into opposing “capitalism.”

      1. But Notley, Trudeau, even Biden have been telling that’s not true, China has cleaned up it’s act, all the pollution is gone. They even shut off all their lights, so we can’t see it. lol. As they’re shovelling OUR coal in there.

  14. This doesn’t include China providing financing to the turd world to build power plants either. Financing designed to make the petty despots in charge of these turd world countries entirely beholden to China

  16. The Chicoms and K-bec have a lot in common.
    They assume they are superior to others and do what needs to be done for their own.
    K-bec dominates Canada now and eventually China will the world.

  17. China recognizes that cheap power is required for development and industrialization….

    our betters are opposed to cheap power

    what does that tell you?

    1. China doesn’t give a fidler’s darn about anything but themselves and making money. No respect for life, no respect for the planet. In their back yard or ours. Our betters are just peddling fear and division. Be it climate change, Covid or systemic racism. Time for the electorate to put on some big boy pants.

  18. In 1936 UK, US and France signed the Second London Naval Treaty. The goal of the treaty was to prevent the naval arms race and avoid future war. Notably absent were the signatories of the previous treaties: Italy and Japan, also absent was Germany, yet the idiots in the West decided to voluntarily hamper the development of their navies in order to make the world a safer place…. the rest is history.

    Pity our alleged leaders haven’t learned from it because parallels are aplenty. Let’s assume that glowbull wormening is real (it is not, but stay with me). Basic game theory tells us what would be the dominant strategy for the West in the game against Chicoms.

    If global economic decline is too occur as a result of too much CO2 then we cannot prevent that decline. We can’t. Period. Not given Chicom actions (well, we could, and should, nuke them them, but it is not going to happen).

    So if we can’t prevent it, what is the logical strategy? It is to be as strong as possible relative to Chicoms (and others) when the decline occurs. If that means us polluting more, then be it. That is it. That is all. That is everything.

    Instead PM Baked Potato and other cretins insist on shoveling shit against the tide.

    1. The result of the 1936 naval treaty would appear to be that, when war came, the British navy swept the German and Italian fleets right off the sea, and the American was fixed to absorb an overwhelming surprise attack and fight back to dominance over the Japanese. In a war that started over issues irrelevant to the sea. How is that a bad thing? Surely this treaty obviously benefitted the Allies?

      1. You either have no clue what you’re talking about or you’re trolling. Which is it?

        In short: Allies triumphed despite and not thanks to the Second London Naval Treaty.

        Now onto specifics.

        “when war came, the British navy swept the German and Italian fleets right off the sea”

        Meanwhile back in the real world The Battle of Atlantic was the single longest continuous campaign of the war that cost tens of thousands of lives and that came dangerously close to knocking UK out of war.
        The Naval war in the Med was very costly to Royal Navy, far from easy, it was a bloody campaign with heavy loses. Evacuation of Crete or Malta convoys being best examples, there were plenty of others.

        “and the American was fixed to absorb an overwhelming surprise attack and fight back to dominance over the Japanese.”

        Your understanding of Pacific war is similarly lacking. It wasn’t the surprise attack but the subsequent battles that bled US Navy. Coral Sea, Midway and especially Guadalcanal let to a situation when by early 1943 US Navy was down to one operational CV and one in repairs and was asking the badly stretched already Royal Navy to lend them one.

        “In a war that started over issues irrelevant to the sea. ”

        Nonsense, but more importantly misleading nonsense. Because even if the issues were not relevant to sea, the control of the seas proved absolutely vital. Coincidently the war started when Schleswig-Holstein opened fire on Westerplatte. So yes, if you want to be technical it started with a naval bombardment.

        “How is that a bad thing?”

        The treaty made US Navy and especially Royal Navy weaker than they otherwise would have been and thus contributed to US and British loses. Clear enough cupcake?

        1. Impressively clear in its details, not so much in its effectiveness. The treaty certainly produced British and American fleets less powerful than they could have been. They were nonetheless powerful enough to deal expeditiously with the forces they were faced with. Of course, the British and Americans lost all chance at spectacularly massive surprise losses, and had to settle for grievous ones.

          When they met reversal, it was at the hands of non-naval air forces, and non-fleet submarine navies that had not been built at the outset of the war, let alone at the signing of the treaty. Perhaps indeed they weren’t built because the treaty was signed? I’ve never looked into it. And of course in a war which begins between two coastal, naval powers, we can expect naval weapons to be used. There was no naval conflict. Germany had all the sea access to Danzig she could possibly have, and everyone happy with that. The problem was elsewhere.

          There was a lot wrong with the way the West faced the challenge of Hitler, and indeed “survivable disaster” is a bit of a generous way of describing the preparations for war. But the problems were in the overall strategy and in various elements other than the naval treaty. That pretty much did what they wanted it to do.

          1. “The treaty certainly produced British and American fleets less powerful than they could have been. ”

            And that in turn caused them to suffer heavier loses during the war.

            “They were nonetheless powerful enough to deal expeditiously with the forces they were faced with. ”

            Again with greater loses than were necessary if they weren’t forced to abide by the treaty.

            “But the problems were in the overall strategy and in various elements other than the naval treaty. ”

            No not “other”, but “together”. Axis powers ended up building whatever they wanted: Bismarcks, Hippers, Littorios, Zaras, Mogamis, Yamatos etc. Meanwhile UK got 14 inch battleships and cramped 8K Colony class.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation