WTF are we doing with China??

[West]

11 hours ago, Goddess said:

Carney just gave them access to our national security and media.

No one is saying "No trading with China."  But trading with them comes with dangers, which Liberals and their supporters keep saying are just "conspiracy theories."

I am saying that. Screw the Chinese 

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, August1991 said:

 And guys like Bush and Carney ain't it. 

Well... Bush represented the deep roots of the PostWar order... and by Bush I mean either one... the whole family.

Carney is more like someone who woefully sees it ending, and is scrambling for something else.

If it's not Busy and Carney, is it Trump ?  Then the polls and economic fundamentals (aside from the stock market of course) are wrong.

So who then ?  I can see a populist who takes a wrecking ball to the bureaucracy and implements a basic floor of social benefits.  But there is no such person today.

[Barquentine]

On 1/16/2026 at 9:17 AM, John Stone said:

Oblique threat to their automotive industry - a direct threat to Canada's.

49,000 vehicles = about 2% of auto sales in Canada per year.

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/global-automakers-grab-bigger-chunk-180859091.html

"Vehicles made outside North America accounted for 34 per cent of Canadian monthly vehicle sales in August."

Who's the threat?

[Barquentine]

21 hours ago, Goddess said:

At some point, Canadians will be begging the orange man to save us from our own stupidity.

Don't hold your breath, 'cause it'll make you blue!

[Barquentine]

21 hours ago, Goddess said:

Every other country was able to figure things out with the US.  We're the outliers.

So untrue. All they got was MOUs. ANNOUNCEABLES!

[Barquentine]

17 hours ago, Goddess said:

Talking to a neighbour here last night, he said he wonders if it will come down to Canada being the battlefield between China and the US and we all agreed sadly that if it came to that, all the Liberal supporter citizens would be fighting FOR the Chinese.  So, civil war, as well

Well at least you've got friends who enable your paranoid fantasies. Digging out your bunker yet?

[Barquentine]

16 hours ago, Goddess said:

The left is so susceptible to indoctrination

Yes, only Right-wing indoctrination is acceptable. Praise Q-anon! Pizza Parlour Pedophiles must be destroyed! 

BlaBlahBlahphuckinBlah!

[Michael Hardner]

18 hours ago, Goddess said:

Everyone is trying to figure out where all this going and what to prepare for.

Don't listen to people who overstate where we are right now, who try to say that we are in unprecedented times etc.

Of course, every time is unprecedented, however, we have only had free markets, free elections and so on at this level for a century or two. So losing these things would not be unprecedented. 

And yet...

We still DO have elections, we still have an economy, we still have courts, we still have free expression.  Any of these things failing significantly would trigger mitigations and strong reactions in the media and with the public.

People who say that this is not the case, who say we are already lost... are playing into the extremist views themselves.

Edited January 17 by Michael Hardner

[ExFlyer]

16 hours ago, ironstone said:

Bill C-69 was literally nicknamed the 'no more pipelines Bill'. Carney himself has previously stated that oil 'should stay in the ground'.

When and where did Carney "stated that oil 'should stay in the ground'."???

 

This Bill????

"Bill C-69 refers to different Canadian federal bills, most notably the landmark

2019 Impact Assessment Act (IAA) that overhauled environmental reviews and created the Canadian Energy Regulator (CER) for major projects. More recently, a 2024 Bill C-69 implemented budget measures, including tax changes for Indigenous settlements, firefighter credits, and a global minimum tax for corporations, showing that C-69 numbers are reused for new legislation"

"

• Replaced the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (2012) with the new Impact Assessment Act (IAA) and established the Canadian Energy Regulator (CER), replacing the National Energy Board (NEB).

• Key Changes:
  • Required federal assessment of environmental, social, and economic impacts, including climate change effects, for major projects.
  • Strengthened Indigenous and public participation in reviews.
  • Created the CER with broader scope and mandate for energy projects."

 

 

Edited January 17 by ExFlyer

[ExFlyer]

15 hours ago, Goddess said:

Did you know CSIS confirmed that China remains our greatest threat in November of 2025?  That's 2 months ago.

You still wanna go with "China is our best friend"?

Canada’s Intelligence Agency Says China Remains One Of The Country’s Most Serious National Security Concerns

In the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Director’s Annual Speech in November, Director Dan Rogers said intelligence linked to the People’s Republic of China continues to target Canada for sensitive government, military, and economic information. He noted that both civilian and military intelligence services have been involved in efforts to identify and recruit Canadians with access to classified or strategically important material.

According to CSIS, recruitment attempts have increasingly relied on social media and online job platforms, which are used to make covert approaches appear legitimate. The agency said it has worked over the past year with Canadian and international partners to detect and disrupt these activities.

China was also identified as a key source of transnational repression in Canada. CSIS said it has documented cases of surveillance, intimidation, and disinformation campaigns linked to Beijing that have targeted members of Chinese and other diaspora communities, including activists and critics of the Chinese government. Intelligence officials warned that such actions threaten free expression and democratic participation.

In the Arctic, CSIS described China as a non-Arctic state seeking to expand its strategic and economic presence in the region. The agency said it has observed intelligence-gathering efforts—both cyber and non-cyber—directed at governments, private companies, and research organizations involved in northern development. CSIS said it is working closely with Indigenous, territorial, and Inuit governments to ensure national security risks are considered when engaging with foreign companies and investors, including those linked to China.

CSIS Director Dan Rogers said China’s activities reflect a broader pattern of state competition aimed at Canada, adding that espionage and foreign interference tied to the PRC remain persistent and increasingly sophisticated threats to Canadian sovereignty.

RCMP restricts use of Chinese-made drones — the vast majority of its fleet | CBC News

Experts said the RCMP needs to be cautious when it comes to Chinese drones, given it cannot vouch for the origin of thousands of parts, software and data-storage systems.

"The concern is legitimate and as a precautionary measure, they have to be careful," said Bendavid.

Wark said that the RCMP seems to have purchased drones "without much thought to strategic needs or security issues."

"In future, all drone purchases by federal agencies for security purposes should be centralized and security vulnerability tests should be performed on them as a matter of course," Wark said.

China has been involved in industrial espionage for many decades all over the world... as has the US, Russia and many other countries (probably Canada too).

Warnings from security services from all countries are the same... that is what they do.

 

Who said China is our best friend? And where? And when???

Your imagination runs wild again and you continue to make $hit up  LOL

[John Stone]

2 hours ago, Barquentine said:

49,000 vehicles = about 2% of auto sales in Canada per year.

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/global-automakers-grab-bigger-chunk-180859091.html

"Vehicles made outside North America accounted for 34 per cent of Canadian monthly vehicle sales in August."

Who's the threat?

I understand Canada  manufactures vehicles - very cheap E.V. imports will likely cut into the market. 

Edited January 17 by John Stone

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, John Stone said:

I understand Canada  manufactures vehicles - very cheap E.V. imports will likely cut into the market. 

The deal should’ve been for a joint venture with Gina, with some of the manufacturing and/or assembly and/or parts provided by Canada.  Basically Carney gave China 50,000 instant car sales, because at that retail price they will all be bought and Canada reaps no economic benefits, except that we did need to give something up to restore our agriculture exports to China. Some deals, clearly, are better than others.  I think Carney could’ve been more savvy.

Edited January 17 by Zeitgeist

[ironstone]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

When and where did Carney "stated that oil 'should stay in the ground'."???

 

Search Assist

Yes, Mark Carney has stated that the vast majority of Earth's remaining reserves of oil, gas, and coal must be left in the ground to avoid catastrophic climate change. He emphasizes that burning these fossil fuels would risk overheating the planet.

Canadian Oil and Gas Industry Reaction to Bill C-69
Executives in Canada's oil and gas industry have largely expressed significant opposition to Bill C-69. Their concerns stem from several key aspects of the legislation.

Reasons for Opposition
Increased Regulatory Burdens:
Industry leaders believe that the bill imposes stricter regulations that complicate the approval process for new projects, leading to longer and more costly timelines.
Uncertainty in Approvals:
The extended assessment periods and added layers of review have created uncertainty regarding project timelines, which can discourage investment.
Economic Impact:
Executives argue that the constraints imposed by the bill could negatively affect the broader economy, particularly in regions reliant on the oil and gas sector for jobs and revenue.
Impact on Competitiveness:
Industry representatives worry that these regulations may make Canadian projects less competitive compared to those in other countries with less stringent requirements, potentially leading to capital flight.
Political Climate:
The political backdrop related to the bill has also contributed to concerns, as many executives feel that government intentions may prioritize environmental considerations over economic growth.
Conclusion
Overall, Canada’s oil and gas industry executives view Bill C-69 as a barrier to development and growth, fostering a climate of apprehension regarding future investments and project approvals.

 

[ExFlyer]

11 minutes ago, ironstone said:

Search Assist

Yes, Mark Carney has stated that the vast majority of Earth's remaining reserves of oil, gas, and coal must be left in the ground to avoid catastrophic climate change. He emphasizes that burning these fossil fuels would risk overheating the planet.

Canadian Oil and Gas Industry Reaction to Bill C-69
Executives in Canada's oil and gas industry have largely expressed significant opposition to Bill C-69. Their concerns stem from several key aspects of the legislation.

Reasons for Opposition
Increased Regulatory Burdens:
Industry leaders believe that the bill imposes stricter regulations that complicate the approval process for new projects, leading to longer and more costly timelines.
Uncertainty in Approvals:
The extended assessment periods and added layers of review have created uncertainty regarding project timelines, which can discourage investment.
Economic Impact:
Executives argue that the constraints imposed by the bill could negatively affect the broader economy, particularly in regions reliant on the oil and gas sector for jobs and revenue.
Impact on Competitiveness:
Industry representatives worry that these regulations may make Canadian projects less competitive compared to those in other countries with less stringent requirements, potentially leading to capital flight.
Political Climate:
The political backdrop related to the bill has also contributed to concerns, as many executives feel that government intentions may prioritize environmental considerations over economic growth.
Conclusion
Overall, Canada’s oil and gas industry executives view Bill C-69 as a barrier to development and growth, fostering a climate of apprehension regarding future investments and project approvals.

 

I asked you as you are quick to make statements without proof.

Fact is, regulations have been lessened.

Impact on competitiveness seems like a problem amongst the oil producers...not government. They need to sort themselves out LOL

Uncertain approvals??  Well, if they were to make proposals and plans...then the MOU that was recently signed would very quickly be approved. 

I did have a look at the Bill and saw no additional regulations or laws. The big addition was that the indigenous were added to the mix.

Overall, the oil and gas executives were upset because it put responsibility upon them and their finances...and out of government funding. In essence put up or shut up LOL

 

 

[ExFlyer]

4 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

The deal should’ve been for a joint venture with Gina, with some of the manufacturing and/or assembly and/or parts provided by Canada.  Basically Carney gave China 50,000 instant car sales, because at that retail price they will all be bought and Canada reaps no economic benefits, except that we did need to give something up to restore our agriculture exports to China. Some deals, clearly, are better than others.  I think Carney could’ve been more savvy.

I think the EV stuff is just show business... all show no go.

EV sales have plummeted. We are not interested. Plants are shutting down or slowing down.

Ye, there may be a surge because there are always those that jump on new bandwagons but, Canada is not into EV's. 

I think opening up the EV imports was a very wise thing to do. China has a huge effort to sell EV's in Canada. Lots of work for Canadians in building and manning dealerships and all the infrastructure, supply chain and logistics needed to sell their EV's.

In the meantime, we get to sell our agricultural and aquacultural products back to where it is beneficial for Canadians. There are far more workers in those areas of the country than auto workers in Ontario.

Edited January 17 by ExFlyer

[John Stone]

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

The deal should’ve been for a joint venture with Gina, with some of the manufacturing and/or assembly and/or parts provided by Canada.  Basically Carney gave China 50,000 instant car sales, because at that retail price they will all be bought and Canada reaps no economic benefits, except that we did need to give something up to restore our agriculture exports to China. Some deals, clearly, are better than others.  I think Carney could’ve been more savvy.

A pauper doesn't 'demand'?  

To use a phrase, 'Canada had no cards'?

China took the opportunity to poke the U.S. in the eye .... 

I'd remind you that China doesn't 'elect' - there is no public pressure to do anything.

China's 'win'  was political, not economic. 

I'm sure you'd agree that Justin could never have negotiated like Carney - but then he  was such a fool he wouldn't have wanted to. 

[ironstone]

17 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

I asked you as you are quick to make statements without proof.

I stated that Carney had previously made a statement to the effect that oil and gas should remain in the ground, or at least the majority of it. The search engine answer did reply that Carney had in fact made that statement about oil, gas and coal.

I also stated that Bill C69 had been nicknamed the 'no more pipelines' Bill and that is also true.

If the things I post(which have been reported in some media outlets) offend you somehow, that's your problem, not mine.

22 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

In essence put up or shut up LOL

Not happening.

[eyeball]

46 minutes ago, ironstone said:

Yes, Mark Carney has stated that the vast majority of Earth's remaining reserves of oil, gas, and coal must be left in the ground to avoid catastrophic climate change.

 

Overall, Canada’s oil and gas industry executives view Bill C-69 as a barrier to development and growth, fostering a climate of apprehension regarding future investments and project approvals.

Well its like this you see, even the possibility of catastrophe should put a damper on things.

Even more so when catastrophe becomes a likelihood and we very likely passed that point years ago.

[eyeball]

22 minutes ago, John Stone said:

I'd remind you that China doesn't 'elect' - there is no public pressure to do anything.

China's 'win'  was political, not economic. 

I wouldn't be so sure about the absence of public pressure or it's effect on China's government.

Like politicians in the West politicians in China need to turn themselves into pretzels to maintain their narratives to convince people and themselves that everything is fine.

Living in la la land is very common around the world now and it's not a healthy place.

Life Has Gotten Surreal in China

The state is ever more insistent on a reality at odds with people’s experience. That’s not a good sign for progress.

The turn comes at a moment when many outside the country perceive it to be on a trajectory of ascent toward possible global dominance. A recent op-ed in The New York Times declared that the long-anticipated “Chinese century,” when the center of global power switches from Washington to Beijing, “may already have dawned.” Inside China, however, the country often seems to be not taking over the world so much as sinking into an autocratic abyss. Maybe these trends can coexist, and China can continue rising globally while deepening its domestic repression. But another trajectory seems just as likely—that an oppressive state will curtail China’s vitality and place a hard limit on its global rise.

https://archive.ph/nDrCb

 

Edited January 17 by eyeball

[Zeitgeist]

25 minutes ago, John Stone said:

A pauper doesn't 'demand'?  

To use a phrase, 'Canada had no cards'?

China took the opportunity to poke the U.S. in the eye .... 

I'd remind you that China doesn't 'elect' - there is no public pressure to do anything.

China's 'win'  was political, not economic. 

I'm sure you'd agree that Justin could never have negotiated like Carney - but then he  was such a fool he wouldn't have wanted to. 

Trudeau only knew how to spend lavishly and act publicly like he had feminist woke values that no honest man with balls would ever embrace.  Carney at least brings intelligence and seriousness to the job.  I still don’t know where he stands ideologically.  One can’t be a net zero globalist one day and a fierce economic nationalist the next.  At least Poilievre has been consistent.  The Liberals come across as phoneys who will go whatever way the wind is blowing to get elected.  Again though, some Liberals are better than others.  

[SpankyMcFarland]

The EV concession in the deal is small for now. Managing this trade is what we have to do. There’s no point pretending BYD don’t exist and aren’t innovating like crazy out there. Our car companies will have to be competitive at some point if we don’t want to turn our auto workers into expensive civil servants. Thus we need to be deeply familiar with the Chinese product. 

And anybody who accuses Carney of inconsistency can’t be serious. Yes, China remains a dangerous partner to do business with but what the heck do you think has happened to our former friend south of the border? I know the poor old National Post has to pretend that things are finer and dandier than they are but we can take an honest look at what’s happening and should do so. 

Edited January 17 by SpankyMcFarland

[John Stone]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

I wouldn't be so sure about the absence of public pressure or it's effect on China's government.

Like politicians in the West politicians in China need to turn themselves into pretzels to maintain their narratives to convince people and themselves that everything is fine.

Living in la la land is very common around the world now and it's not a healthy place.

Life Has Gotten Surreal in China

The state is ever more insistent on a reality at odds with people’s experience. That’s not a good sign for progress.

The turn comes at a moment when many outside the country perceive it to be on a trajectory of ascent toward possible global dominance. A recent op-ed in The New York Times declared that the long-anticipated “Chinese century,” when the center of global power switches from Washington to Beijing, “may already have dawned.” Inside China, however, the country often seems to be not taking over the world so much as sinking into an autocratic abyss. Maybe these trends can coexist, and China can continue rising globally while deepening its domestic repression. But another trajectory seems just as likely—that an oppressive state will curtail China’s vitality and place a hard limit on its global rise.

https://archive.ph/nDrCb

 

......... China's method of crowd control. 

An autocratic abyss would have been in Mao's era. 

China today is an international player - their economic  strategy in the form of 'silk roads'  extends decades into the future. 

Doubtful any Western Nation with a population (and history) akin to China could have done so much and gone so far in the tenure that they have been a  country and not a conglomeration of district warlords, invaders and imperialism.

Fk'n miracle. 

China is stable - I attribute that to their political ideology - and I don't applaud it. 

In comparison look at North Korea. 

 

 

 

[ExFlyer]

2 hours ago, ironstone said:

I stated that Carney had previously made a statement to the effect that oil and gas should remain in the ground, or at least the majority of it. The search engine answer did reply that Carney had in fact made that statement about oil, gas and coal.

I also stated that Bill C69 had been nicknamed the 'no more pipelines' Bill and that is also true.

If the things I post(which have been reported in some media outlets) offend you somehow, that's your problem, not mine.

Not happening.

 

I asked you to prove your statement. You have only said they are in a search somewhere...you did not provide anything except say "Search Assist". It is your statement to defend, not mine to research.

Nope, not offended in any way....you can take them in any way you wish. I read what oil executives purportedly said.

I take them seeing a critic being upset because they are not getting their way.

You are correct, "not Happening"...the oil execs may have complained but they are not going to do anything unless someone else pays for it...

Edited January 17 by ExFlyer

[herbie]

Quote

• •  
•  

•  

Posted 1 hour ago

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

I wouldn't be so sure about the absence of public pressure or it's effect on China's government.

Like politicians in the West politicians in China need to turn themselves into pretzels to maintain their narratives to convince people and themselves that everything is fine.

Living in la la land is very common around the world now and it's not a healthy place.

Life Has Gotten Surreal in China

The state is ever more insistent on a reality at odds with people’s experience. That’s not a good sign for progress.

The turn comes at a moment when many outside the country perceive it to be on a trajectory of ascent toward possible global dominance. A recent op-ed in The New York Times declared that the long-anticipated “Chinese century,” when the center of global power switches from Washington to Beijing, “may already have dawned.” Inside China, however, the country often seems to be not taking over the world so much as sinking into an autocratic abyss. Maybe these trends can coexist, and China can continue rising globally while deepening its domestic repression. But another trajectory seems just as likely—that an oppressive state will curtail China’s vitality and place a hard limit on its global rise.

https://archive.ph/nDrCb

 

Expand  

......... China's method of crowd control. 

And after Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan you could go down the street and buy a Lada. But now BAD is BAD and you must completely shun anyone who doesn't meet your personal approval.

[ExFlyer]

2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Trudeau only knew how to spend lavishly and act publicly like he had feminist woke values that no honest man with balls would ever embrace.  Carney at least brings intelligence and seriousness to the job.  I still don’t know where he stands ideologically.  One can’t be a net zero globalist one day and a fierce economic nationalist the next.  At least Poilievre has been consistent.  The Liberals come across as phoneys who will go whatever way the wind is blowing to get elected.  Again though, some Liberals are better than others.  

Consistent at what???

What has PP done? Besides complain? 

What can PP do?  He cannot even leave the country to find out what is actually happening in the world. There is no world leader wanting to speak with him. Face it, PP is a zero, a nobody on the world stage.