Well well well I am sure our favorite China troll will love to come in and try and prove this wrong but the evidence is crystal clear and something well known. To cheapy refine rare earths like China does results in dramatic and catastrophic damage to the environment that you cant easily address. Its why the US phased out refining years ago because the cheap and dirty plants were not legal anymore and it wasn't worth the much higher price point of the clean methods.
Thankfully over the last 15 years US researchers have made incredible advancements that significantly lower the price and make it possible to refine in the US again. I have been working on a pretty detailed and in depth piece over this that I plan on finishing up and then sharing soon. Good ol capitalism has come through once again with rare earths and permanent magnet manufacturing.
MP Materials already has their magnet manufacturing plant operating in California and USA Rare Earth's Stillwater Plant is already expanding to be able to produce 1,200 metric tons of magnet production and they have moved their Round Top mine in Texas operation FORWARD two years to 2028. That doesn't even factor in the new permanent magnet tech that doesn't require rare earths that Niron Magnetics has pioneered. Its first magnets are rolling off the line this year from its pilot scale plant as its first full scale is being built. From that plant under construction they are expecting to churn out 1,500 tons of magnets per year by early 2027.
Safe to say the stranglehold is ending and China is going to be left not only without what their leverage centers on but have poisoned the land, water, and hundreds of millions of people. Its not cheap to clean up contaminated areas.... Look at the US Superfund sites.
@Solomonsatoshi what are your thoughts
HAHAHAHAHAHA I didnt want to be the one who did it since he comes running like a little rat dog to me all the time! I am dying laughing! Cant wait to see the attempt to spin out of this and hear how everything is fine and ya know maybe mercury and heavy metals are actually good for us to eat!
Hahaha 😂
Do you contest that the revival of rare earths refining in the US and allied nations is being driven by the US government and huge sums of taxpayer dollars?
Do you deny the urgency of this Trump led State Capitalism is because without secure supp,y of rare earths the US military industrial combine is fucked?
The USA uses its military dominance to secure and source resources globally.
It also uses its military to support and sustain the US petrodollar global hegemony without which the USA would be insolvent.
The USA is not a haven of free market capitalism - it is a brutal military industrial hegemony imposing its will by force upon the rest of the world and bludging off the rest of the world as a consequence.
Just as the US sends its soldier into battle to sustain its hegemony China sends its workers into rare earths refining plants to enable it to contest US hegemony.
The war is underway and the US and China are fighting for global dominance.
There will be casualties on both sides- there already are- and as they say the first casualty is the truth.
Here are some of the relevant historical facts evidencing US military aggression directed at other nations and peoples.
Petrodollar hegemony is backed by the US military.
Nations USA has invaded up to 2013 -
(1) American Indian nations (1776 onwards, American Indian Genocide; 1803, Louisiana Purchase; 1844, Indians banned from east of the Mississippi; 1861 onwards, California genocide; 1890, Lakota Indians massacre), (2) Mexico (1836-1846; 1913; 1914-1918;
1923), (3) Nicaragua (1856-1857; 1894; 1896; 1898; 1899; 1907; 1910; 1912-1933; 1981-1990), (4) American forces deployed against Americans (1861-1865, Civil War; 1892; 1894; 1898; 1899-1901; 1901; 1914; 1915; 1920-1921; 1932; 1943; 1967; 1968; 1970; 1973; 1992; 2001), (5), Argentina (1890), (6), Chile (1891; 1973), (7) Haiti (1891; 1914-1934; 1994; 2004-2005), (8) Hawaii (1893-), (9) China (1895-1895; 1898-1900; 1911-1941; 1922-1927; 1927-1934; 1948-1949; 1951-1953; 1958), (10) Korea (1894-1896; 1904-1905; 1951-1953), (11) Panama (1895; 1901-1914; 1908; 1912; 1918-1920; 1925; 1958; 1964; 1989-), (12) Philippines (1898-1910; 1948-1954; 1989; 2002-), (13) Cuba (1898-1902; 1906-1909; 1912; 1917-1933; 1961; 1962), (14) Puerto Rico (1898-; 1950; ); (15) Guam (1898-), (16) Samoa (1899-), (17) Honduras (1903; 1907; 1911; 1912; 1919; 1924-1925; 1983-1989), (18) Dominican Republic (1903-1904; 1914; 1916-1924; 1965-1966), (19) Germany (1917-1918; 1941-1945; 1948; 1961), (20) Russia (1918-1922), (21) Yugoslavia (1919; 1946; 1992-1994; 1999), (22) Guatemala (1920; 1954; 1966-1967), (23) Turkey (1922), (24) El Salvador (1932; 1981-1992), (25) Italy (1941-1945); (26) Morocco (1941-1945), (27) France (1941-1945), (28) Algeria (1941-1945), (29) Tunisia (1941-1945), (30) Libya (1941-1945; 1981; 1986; 1989; 2011), (31) Egypt (1941-1945; 1956; 1967; 1973; 2013), (32) India (1941-1945), (33) Burma (1941-1945), (34) Micronesia (1941-1945), (35) Papua New Guinea (1941-1945), (36) Vanuatu (1941-1945), (37) Austria (1941-1945), (38) Hungary (1941-1945), (39) Japan (1941-1945), (40) Iran (1946; 1953; 1980; 1984; 1987-1988; ), (41) Uruguay (1947), (42) Greece (1947-1949), (43) Vietnam (1954; 1960-1975), (44) Lebanon (1958; 1982-1984), (45) Iraq (1958; 1963; 1990-1991; 1990-2003; 1998; 2003-2011), (46) Laos (1962-), (47) Indonesia (1965), (48) Cambodia (1969-1975; 1975), (49) Oman (1970), (50) Laos (1971-1973), (51) Angola (1976-1992), (52) Grenada (1983-1984), (53) Bolivia (1986; ), (54) Virgin Islands (1989), (55) Liberia (1990; 1997; 2003), (56) Saudi Arabia (1990-1991), (57) Kuwait (1991), (58) Somalia (1992-1994; 2006), (59) Bosnia (1993-), (60) Zaire (Congo) (1996-1997), (61) Albania (1997), (62) Sudan (1998), (63) Afghanistan (1998; 2001-), (64) Yemen (2000; 2002-), (65) Macedonia (2001), (66) Colombia (2002-), (67) Pakistan (2005-), (68) Syria (2008; 2011-), (69) Uganda (2011), (70) Mali (2013), (71) Niger (2013).
Here is a summary of post-1950 avoidable mortality/ 2005 population (both in millions, m) and expressed as a percentage (%) for each country occupied by the US in the post-1945 era. The asterisk () indicates a major occupation by more than one country in the post-WW2 era (thus, for example, the UK and the US have been major occupiers of Afghanistan , Iraq and Korea , leaving aside the many other minor participants in these conflicts). Data is also given for the US: US [8.455m/300.038m = 2.8%], Afghanistan [16.609m/25.971m = 64.0%], Cambodia* [5.852m/14.825m = 39.5%], Dominican Republic [0.806m/8.998m = 9.0%], Federated States of Micronesia [0.016m/0.111m = 14.4%], Greece* [0.027m/10.978m = 0.2%], Grenada* [0.018m/0.121m = 14.9%], Guam [0.005m/0.168m = 3.0%], Haiti* [4.089m/8.549m = 47.9%], Iraq* [5.283m/26.555m = 19.9%], Korea* [7.958m/71.058m = 11.2%], Laos* [2.653m/5.918m = 44.8%], Panama [0.172m/3.235m = 5.3%], Philippines [9.080m/82.809m = 11.0%], Puerto Rico [0.039m/3.915m = 1.0%], Somalia* [5.568m/10.742m = 51.8%], US Virgin Islands [0.003m/0.113m = 2.4%], Vietnam* [24.015m/83.585m = 28.7%], total = 82.193m/357.651m = 23.0%.
Thus in the period 1950-2005 there have been 82 million avoidable deaths from deprivation (avoidable mortality, excess deaths, excess mortality , deaths that did not have to happen) associated with countries occupied by the US in the post-1945 era.
S I L E N C E
@Undisciplined @BlokchainB @SimpleStacker
Notice who hasnt commented AT ALL on this lmaooooo
He couldnt spin his way out of this one I guess!
Sorry but I'm not funded by the US taxpayer to spend all day scrolling SNs and spreading US imperialst apologist spin...like you are.
Ive been plastering drywall all morning thanks and its much more enjoyable and rewarding than engaging with your US exceptionalist imperialist militarist delusions.
Yet you don’t save the fruit of your labor in the Yuan!!
Quite true but you overlook the fact that @Cje95 is a US taxpayer funded apologist for US military aggression and presumably gets paid in dollars...while he continually alleges I am a CCP bot when this is demonstrably bullshit.
Yes I hold most of my liquid savings in BTC, not Yuan, or dollar.
What is absurd is that because I have pointed out the fact of Chinese economic success based on a mixed economy you immediately allege I am Chinese or somehow pro Chinese when that is simply not the case- you appear incapable of discerning the difference between acknowledging relevant facts and arguments and blind US exceptionalist or other nationalist bias.
The fact is both US and China are major nations and Chinas economy is headed to eclipse the US, but the US has to date been far more reliant upon external power projection and invasion and other interventions in the sovereignty of other nations than China has.
USA is significantly the worse in terms of sheer bullying and imperialism...at least to date.
Just wait
You need to summon. Watch this
#1405040
CCP Denies the validity of this video
Does the US government still deny its involvement with Britain in the removal of Irans elected Mossadgh government in the 1950s and the installation of the US puppet Shah?
S I L E N C E.
Does the US government still deny the CIAs involvement in the 1970s Indonesia coup where over 1 million people were murdered on the orders of the CIA and the elected Indonesian leader Sukarno was removed and a compliant US puppet was installed enabling the carve up of Indonesias considerable resources to US corporates?
S I L E N C E.
This doesn’t hold a candle to all the deaths the CCP is related to. Mao was a terrible leader for the millions that died under his rule.
Actually the estimated 80 million dead due to US interventions overseas does exceed the number of Chinese who have died due to civil internal conflicts during the 20th century.
Do you understand the difference between internal conflicts within a nation (like the US civil war) and military conflicts that a nation has gone out and started like the multiple invasions of other countries the US has engaged in over the last 100 years?
How many have died outside of Chinas territory due to Chinese interventions in other nations? Nothing like the millions that have died due to US militarist adventures outside of the US.
Okay so lets go with civil wars... US had roughly 620,000 deaths from both sides 2/3 of which were due to illness not even from battle. China still killed millions of its own people. Not even remotely close to compare those to.
However, lets go through some recent history for you for what China has done to its neighbors since WWII.
I mean the lowest hanging fruit is what you did to Tibet. Tibet was a de facto independent state for almost 40 years before yall invaded and not only crushed them but have since have systematically tried to destroy their culture. China is officially an atheist country but have unilaterally declared that the government gets to choose the next Dalai Lama and when the current Dalai Lama chose the 11th Panchen Lama Gedhun Choekyi Nyima China retaliated by kidnapping a 6 year old who has not been seen since.
Now that we touched the easy one lets go with just a few other wars ya had with your neighbors... we got all the times you have clashed with India which has resulted in at least a few thousand deaths (using the Chinese Media numbers) but likely many more given no how China reports data in general along with losing the second war (given the very low bar for the word war you have established). I mean ya had a third conflict just a couple of years ago with between 50 and 100 Chinese killed.
Lets pop over to Vietnam next as between 1979-1991 yall had a series of conflicts we will call them. During this time in both Vietnam but also Laos you armed and trained ethnic resistance groups to attack both countries governments. The Battle of Laoshan and subsequent attacks by China into Vietnam were textbook what not to do in a war. China with its crazy discrepancy in the number of fighters was only able to get 2.5 km into Vietnam or 1.6 miles. They suffered thousands of casualties and death to go.... a mile and a half.... In the 5 weeks the Battle of Laoshan lasted an estimated 7,500 casualties alone anddddddd you gave all of it back in the end. With the whole conflict with Vietnam despite having an army at minimum twice the size engaged in the conflict and the superior weaponry China suffered more casualties than Vietnam.
Oh any ya funded, trained, and supported the Khmer Rouge which killed 25% of its population!
Lastly lets wrap this up with a good one Korea. According to Chinese official sources, approximately 183,108 soldiers were killed, with an additional 383,218 wounded, 25,621 missing, and 21,400 captured. Oh and China spent roughly 1/3 of the entire governments budget just on this war alone.
Now all of these listed above... they are just the neighbors of China who continues to still lack the logistical capability of a military like the US.
If China had not taken Tibet the US would have installed nukes there and China would have never been more than a few minutes away from US nuclear attack. I agree it is tragic the cultural effect- but comparable roughly in terms of cultural aggression perhaps to the absolutely criminal treatment if indigenous American tribes.
BTW you write as if I am Chinese- this is not true and you know it.
I live in New Zealand, am of UK/Irish blood and have no affiliation with China.
I have not worked for any employer except myself for over 40 years so please stop insulting me and readers with assertions that I am Chinese or in any way other than a neutral observer interested in politics history and the growing and significant conflict that has developed between the US and China.
Now to the other conflicts - starting with Korea- when the CCP swept to power after the US nuked Japan and airlifted the Japanese occupying forces out of eastern China and Korea, where Japanese had enslaved the populations to servitute and support of the Japanese WW2 efforts, the CCP still faced considerable opposition from within China- many groups especially ethic groups with strong religious beliefs feared the Communists. But the US occupation of Korea and the advance of US troops through Korea toward China gave Mao the perfect opportunity to unite China in the purpose of self defense- China united to prevent the US who had taken over from the brutal Japanese occupation of Korea and pushed back the US occupying troops to where they remain today. WW2 literally never ended in Korea. To this day the two sides remain in a state of ceasefire. the threat of US invasion via Korea unite China under the CCP and to this day the threat of US imperialism remains a strong uniting force within the narrative and beliefs of Chinese people.
It is for good reason as Chinese can see the US has since WW2 become the global super power- taking over from the British Empire.
The other border dispute between China and India and Vietnam go back centuries.
Today China is reclaiming its traditional sphere of regional hegemony over countries it shares a land border with- Laos and Cambodia and most of Myanmar are already tribute states to China.
The big question that interests me is from what we know to date is China as aggressive militarily as US? The answer historically is clearly No.
Modern China has been predominantly defensive in its use of military force- as the examples you gave mostly show...mostly defensive ultimately from real or perceived US sourced military threats.
In the past (pre Opium Wars) China had expected tribute from nations on its border but those further afield of economic importance usually had Chinese settlements (Chinatowns) well established and co existing, often for hundreds of years to facilitate that trade.
In future if China continues to gain on and overtake US economic and military power how would China behave as a dominant power?
This interests me hugely as a New Zealander- we have traditionally been a UK/US Five Eyes aligned military and economic ally, but today like many countries enjoy most of our mercantile trade growth is with China whom we have a free trade agreement and highly complimentary economies.
How will modern China behave as a global super power?
Will it be forced into the pattern of militaristic power projection and interference with other nations in the same way as the US has done or might China operate on a different model?
Historically it seems possible China might be less inclined toward military aggression and more inclined toward economic ties, but imo the imperatives of empire are often ultimately brutal in terms of needing to assert ones 'property rights' as the recent kidnapping of the Venezuela president by the US and the dozens of US military and espionage attacks upon other nations since WW2 demonstrates.
Whether China could operate on a different model is a fascinating question with global implications. Is it even possible that the nature of future Chinese hegemony might in some way be shaped by events as they unfold over coming decades and that we might have influence over?
Only, perhaps, if we consider the possibilities and take action preemptively.
Hahahahahaha!!! They will take care of it the way they have other messes...... ignore it and say nananananana until it goes away
I like that guy’s space videos. He has some dumb economic misunderstandings but they rarely surface.