I agree with you. Right now, it would be good if Trump was our president. His attempts to have a friendly relationship with Russia was the first sign of the 70-year old hostility with  Russia coming to an end. However, our "Deep State" won't allow that. This may have been the main reason for the "Trump must go" opration.

Biden's handlers have been  pushing Biden to create more conflict, by supplying the Ukraine with weapons and urging them to fight Russia.

WE are getting closer and closer to a major conflict. Russia has already moved nuclear weapons into the area.

I posted in the TR section about this subject

Here is a good description of the latest developments...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9472071/Vladimir-Putin-ready-roll-Ukraine-fears-brink-invasion-nuclear-threat.html

Wayne,

These are magnificent points.

What we think that we know on those topics is mainly what they want us to think that we know.

The sources/gatekeepers of information are only going to tell us things that are more like propaganda to support their political agenda. They will always paint themselves as the good guys and the ones they are confronting as the bad guys.

They will always have real good sounding/convincing reasons. 

Since we don't have access to the real reasons and the inside story/information, we have no choice but to believe their story.

Many of the facts and stories are actually mostly true but we can never tell when they are not true(which is alot of the time) because the truth and the fake news look and sound exactly the same. 

If we go back in history to things like the Iraq War, we can see now how it was all based on a lie(s).............but at the time, the lies sounded extremely convincing and appeared as the truth.

In the 1960's/early 70's so many lies about why the Vietnam War was good and  secretly using agent Orange for a decade that, today look like major war crimes committed by people in the US who made those decisions, that never got charged with doing anything wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange

Agent Orange is a herbicide and defoliant chemical, one of the "tactical use" Rainbow Herbicides. It is widely known for its use by the U.S. military as part of its herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand,^[1] during the Vietnam War from 1961 to 1971.^[2] It is a mixture of equal parts of two herbicides, 2,4,5-T and 2,4-D. In addition to its damaging environmental effects, traces of dioxin (mainly TCDD, the most toxic of its type)^[3] found in the mixture have caused major health problems for many individuals who were exposed.

You mentioned Bush and the Iraq war

Some history some may not know about our war role and Iraq.

Our prime minister [Chretien] at the time refused to join the USA in invading Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein from power

Chretien was sceptical of the Bush claims of secret weapons of mass destruction and argued for closer inspection, U.N involvement and a lot more that strained relations between Canada and the USA,  due to our refusal to join the second war with Iraq. 

Bush  11 got in such a snit he cancelled a planned trip to Ottawa, Canada and threatened dire repercussions in trade relations, but Canada kept a level head, asked for U.N inspections that meant actual inspections and now, many yrs later we are not sorry we did not join that war.

In the 1st war Bush 1  convinced Canada to join that war, which seemed to be a just cause to Canadians.. Actually what we did was maintain our ships within communication distance and co-ordinated the many nations all of which spoke different languages etc plus troop movement. Not many people know of our role with Bush 1 but Bush 11 was a bit trigger happy to suit Canada and WMD seemed to not be as great a danger, given a lack of compelling evidence had not been done according to the U.N role at the time., at least what Chretien thought at the time. Chretien as I have said faced a strained relationship with the USA which lingered for many yrs., some say even much later when Paul Martin [Chretien's right hand man]. was unsuccessful in his bid for election as prime minister The war and trade relations, some say, affected our  election but trade relationships, not as much as some thought might happen.

This is a question with no answer that I know

We know that Taiwan leads the world along with the USA in micro chip technology

Now if you were china who makes mostly low quality chips and Taiwan makes high quality chips and leads in advanced research and new chip manufacture as their tech moves into production 

Would china invade Taiwan with a definite disadvantage in the chip world. I will bet a lot of military equipment depends on high quality chips. The USA, France and probably many others are experimenting with robots as front line military.  The tech world is changing quickly. 

So: Would china invade Taiwan for their chip technology. Would China think they could commandeer the chip factories, force the engineers to work for china, or would China come to the conclusion forced labour and expertise would result in the USA quickly becoming a more robust economy and stronger military due to advances in chips

China lags the world badly in high quality chip production and have tried massive amounts of money to close the gap or catch up. However, china is not making much progress as Taiwan and the USA keep moving ahead. The goal post won't stand still for china

I imagine a lot of pros and cons go into a debate about invading Taiwan of which chips is just one tiny cog in a giant wheel of possible out comes

China is not doing so good making high quality chips.

I wonder if they give chip technology much thought in the bigger picture

Good points(I didn't know about Canada and the Iraq war) and great questions about China.

Other thoughts?