也无风雨也无晴

你来看此花时，则此花颜色一时明白起来，便知此花不在你的心外。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@ar2652006328 想来先生还记得我。实在惭愧，不通音律，却一时兴起，班门弄斧，还要感谢先生的指教。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@ar2652006328 见先生上联，不由得想起了杨慎的临江仙，转而王风黍离中的行迈靡靡���蹦了出来，姑且捏在一起，贻笑大方了。

白发相逢，行迈靡靡，春风秋月依旧，尽浊酒付笑谈。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@yiyayi_ 有啊，俺常去北海公园晨练算不？

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@yiyayi_ 它那么胖的责任在你不在它。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@firesporp @dyw1968316 从时间先看，马跟萧王起了龌蹉应该是更早，其间萧投郑，而马的失智，对彼此关系恶化加剧又起了多大作用外人就不得而知。这件事马已经被重创，非常不值。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@dyw1968316 @firesporp 失智者最典型的表现是会伤害到周边互动最紧密的人，而不是简单的信任和依赖，邓兄找些失智的案例看就明白了。有点像心智不全，容易情绪化，那谁跟他最紧密就最遭殃。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@ar2652006328 整件事的危机管理一团糟，几个月下来，没看见任何保护马的人强力介入，让局势一步一步滑落到如今的境地，让马承受了如此重创。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@yuyy614893671 千言万语汇成一句，我要收费。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@wangzhian8848 别蹭，你不配。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@zhangheci 马英九有没有病，应该有医疗记录，马家人的表态应该是个最有力的旁证，在病历没有公布的当下。金组织的那场表演，是把马当成了提线木偶，其心可诛。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

马英九闹这一出是将自己挂起来慢慢凌迟，指定的刽子手是金溥聪，小刀一刀刀割下去。如果这还不算失智，那怎样才算？
整件事看不出任何危机管理，马家人直到事情无可挽回之际才出面一搏，但为时已晚，大势已去，居心叵测者的鸿门宴已端上台面。
到目前为止伤得最重的就是马英九，今后也是。

[Rapid Response 47 @RapidResponse47]

WATCH IN FULL: President Donald J. Trump's interview with @BretBaier in Beijing

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

卢大人没来，是鲁大人来了。😂

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@wangzhian8848 王志安这是引导性叙事，仅一句“日据时代对台湾推行殖民统治，不服从的进行残酷镇压”就一笔带过了整个殖民时期日本在台湾的罪行：“如雾社事件、土地掠夺��经济剥削模式、台湾人吃番薯而米粮出口日本等”

顺便说一句，这位“单纯的技术人员”是在二战去菲律宾执行任务过程中被美军潜艇送进太平洋的。

[Ray Dalio @RayDalio]

I have been asked by several people what I meant when I said “we are in a world war” in my most recent note. To be clear, I didn’t mean to convey that I expect a shooting war between the U.S. and China (or any of the great powers) anytime soon. What I meant is that we are in the phase of the Big Cycle when major powers are in military wars and that the various wars happening now are interrelated, hence we are in a “world war," with the sides lined up as I described and with the implications for each of the main players and the whole unfolding in relatively classic interrelated ways that I describe as a progression of the Big Cycle.

For example, it is now widely believed that if the U.S. fails to open the Strait of Hormuz to have free shipping and to protect its Gulf Allies from attacks, countries all around the world (most importantly in Asia) will conclude that the U.S. might not be the strong ally and countervailing force to China that they thought it would be. which will lead some to tilt economically and geopolitically more toward China in a number of ways - e.g. to buy less U.S. debt (which is what happened to the British in the Suez Crisis, bringing about the ultimate end of their Empire) - and it could lead others to build up their military capabilities.  As I complete my nearly three-week trip in Asia, I can convey that what I am saying is based on a lot more than conjecture.

The reason I do not expect a U.S.-China military war soon, but I do expect a lot of brinksmanship, is because both nations realize that such a war would be devastating and that it would be impossible to fully win over the other, at the same time as they won’t want to give much.  Also, each country believes in its own economic and political systems and that the outcomes of those systems will determine their relative powers. And both nations have critically important domestic issues to deal with.  Some people in leadership positions, especially in China, believe that the relative health, wealth, and power levels between countries is not as important as their own absolute health, wealth, and power levels, and that helping each other build these rather than tear them down is most important. For example, they believe that the world will be a dangerous place if the U.S. and China don't have AI cooperations and controls, and they are concerned that AI can be weaponized. Most countries know that most wars in history were won by one of the sides secretly developing new technologically advanced weapons and showing them to their opponents.

So, I believe that both sides think that their wars will be non-military wars that will yield evolutionary changes in relative powers.  As for how the Chinese will fight, and how the world order related to it will evolve, it will probably look more like the type of war described in the “Art of War” (which I suggest you read if you haven't), and for how the new international world order will evolve, to the extent that it is influenced by the Chinese, it will evolve to be more like the tribute system (which I suggest you understand if you don’t) than the existing world order.

At the same time, I expect that there will continue to be trade, capital, technology, cyber, and geopolitical influence wars between these great powers and that both will continue to have justifiable fears of being cut off from essential goods, services, and capital that will necessarily will greatly reduce imbalances and interdependencies as well as efficiencies in production and trade of goods, services, and capital. I also believe we will increasingly see these two powerful nations pressure each other because there is no other way to resolve disputes now that the rules-based multilateral world order has been replaced by a power-based, self-serving world order.

Said differently, I expect that China will be very strong in its defense without being very aggressive in its offense.  That is not just for tactical reasons; it is also because China has strong cultural inclinations to be that way.

I hope this is helpful in clarifying my thinking and as always I'd be happy to answer any other questions or hear your thoughts.

Ray

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@laoziqiniu 老牛现在每天干啥？乘这个机会出游吧。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

从川普的全国讲话看，对伊战争大概率是烂尾了，搞个一地鸡毛，然后拍拍屁股走人。

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@Mac_auu @2dayinsocialism @afshinrattansi Catalonia also has its own distinct culture, language, and strong sense of identity, but that doesn’t make it a colony.

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@Mac_auu @2dayinsocialism @afshinrattansi While some agree with your view, under international law the Tibet issue is mainly seen as a nationalist or separatist conflict within a sovereign state — not decolonization.

[也无风雨也无晴 @bbhugTW]

@2dayinsocialism @afshinrattansi Under int'l law, 'colony' means a geographically separate, ethnically distinct territory under subjugation.Not sure how well you know Tibet’s history or the law, but I'm not endorsing the original tweet. Just clarifying Tibet doesn't fit the definition of a colony.