**Obama declares war with China** through Executive order (economical)

reply to post by Hiasyouwant

Wouldn't the strategic partnership, alliance, be enough to be included as an indirect action undermining democratic process, from the United States point of view?

Not unless there was material support provided for that action. Has China, as part of its "strategic partnership" provided material support for Russia's invasion of Crimea?

Directly stating that if any government buts in further in the ukraine, that the land it owns or will ever own, will be blocked and may not be dealt in.

Except that it does not mention governments in the list of "entities."

At the very least, this executive order prevented China from butting in further and caused a little crap in their pants, would you admit that?

No. China expressed this position before the order was issued. It seems that China is making a very strong effort to remain neutral in the situation, as is its stated policy.

"We condemn the recent extreme violent behavior in Ukraine, and continue to urge all sides in Ukraine to peacefully resolve their disputes within a legal framework, and conscientiously protect the legal rights all the peoples of Ukraine," the ministry said in a statement on its website (www.mfa.gov.cn)

news.yahoo.com...

Tell me, was this order a declaration of economic war on China too?
www.whitehouse.gov...

reply to post by Phage


It does mention government, we've been over this already. The EO states persons as an individual or entity, entity as group, sub group, organization, ECT. A government is a group. That's a fact and if you make me I'll get the definition again.

I am not saying China is the only entity that this EO could pertain to, but there is no way you can honestly say China cannot possibly be included, or ever included in this EO. As long as an entity has interests in property(which China DOES) AND were deemed as directly or indirectly undermining the westenized diplomacy(which is subject opinion of the US gov). China may or may not have done so yet but that's irrelevent, because your argument is that this executive order cannot pertain to China in anyway, and that is not right, because it can, and does pertain to China. And while this executive order was not meant for China only, it's fact that China was affected by it. How can they be affected from an executive order if it in no way shape or form pertained to them?

reply to post by Hiasyouwant

Weren't you saying Russia wasn't involved or included in this EO either?

Again...

If your talking about the EO that this thread is supposedly talking about then no Russia isn't involved.

But...

If your discussing the EO that you link to then yes Russia is involved, but China is not.

So which one is it?

reply to post by Hiasyouwant

A definition of group which includes "governments" would be helpful. But why not specify "government" actions? Why not specify governments? Why the song and dance? It's not as if executive orders have not been specific in talking about governments in the past.


Oh. BTW, was Bush declaring economic war on Russia? After all, they supported the government of Zimbabwe. Were Chinese and Russian assets "seized" when China and Russia vetoed sanctions?
georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov...

Seems that this type of EO is more a form letter than a declaration of economic war.

reply to post by tsurfer2000h


The only executive order I've posted or talked about is the one from the OP.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Please show me where I posted a different EO.

reply to post by Phage

gov·ern·ment: group of people who control and make decisions for a country, state, etc.

www.merriam-webster.com...

to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, any activity described in subsection (a)(i) or (a)(ii) of this section or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order;

I'm sure Russia and China are trading a lot of goods, supporting one another, technological support ect, every day. Russia is atleast doing one of the following.

(i) to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, directly or indirectly, any of the following: (A) actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in Ukraine
(B) actions or policies that threaten the peace, security, stability, sovereignty, or territorial integrity of Ukraine; or

(C) misappropriation of state assets of Ukraine or of an economically significant entity in Ukraine;;

www.whitehouse.gov...
So yes, if sh*t hits the fan, then the US can legally execute executive order in reguard to property that China/Russia owns within the US

reply to post by Hiasyouwant

www.merriam-webster.com...

You went backwards with that. I want a definition of group which includes "government."

I'm sure Russia and China are trading a lot of goods, supporting one another, technological support ect, every day. Russia is atleast doing one of the following.

We trade with Russia, I guess that means we're supporting them too. I guess that everyone's assets are subject to blocking then.

to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, any activity described in subsection (a)(i) or (a)(ii) of this section or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order;

Is China providing financial, material, or technological support, goods or services in support of Russia's invasion of Crimea? Is China supporting any "person" whose assets have been frozen as a result of the order?

An Economic War ???

America is Kinda Hurting themselves are they Not ! ?

The World Is a Business and a Big Part of the American Business ( Company's ) is Over sea's CHINA!

Network (1976) - Ned Beatty - "The World is a Business"


Sad This Clip from the Movie Network ( 1976 )
just Very Little Production of Business in China most in Japan at the Time

SO How Much Truth of what this Clip of the Movie Network is saying ! ??

The video was just reaching too far if you ask me. Their trying a bit hard to connect dots indirectly it seems.

Just because China supported Russia's idea, doesn't mean that they are apart of it. And this surely was not a declaration of war.

This thread = classic ATS