×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

738 comments

Woot for me (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956334)

I'm glad I invested in all these Bucky Balls when Woot had them on sale a while ago. I can supply them... for a small convenience charge.

Re:Woot for me (1, Insightful)

thehostiles (1659283) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956498)

if I were you, I'd hold onto them. apparently we'll run out of rare earth elements by 2017
http://news.slashdot.org/story/08/07/01/2331207/Supplies-of-Rare-Earth-Elements-Exhausted-By-2017 [slashdot.org]

or not. I'm still waiting for us to run out of all this oil we've run out of.

Re:Woot for me (-1, Troll)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956710)

I'm still waiting for us to run out of all this oil we've run out of.

Did someone tell you we'd run out of oil by 2010?

Didn't think so.

Way to prove their point! (5, Interesting)

russotto (537200) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956338)

From TFA, emphasis mine:

The United Steelworkers, in a September petition to the Obama administration, argue that China is unfairly subsidizing exports to encourage companies in the country to send their clean energy products around the world. At the same time, the union accuses China of limiting the exports of certain rare-earth minerals necessary to produce solar panels so that foreign companies will settle in the country.

Re:Way to prove their point! (-1, Troll)

aliquis (678370) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956420)

So China actually support and subsidize their green energy industry? Boho!! That no capitalism! How could they? Damn socialists!

Stop whining and do something yourself, also do people really need to export everything they may have better use for themselves? I don't see us (Sweden) exporting any Uranium. And we subsidize green technology (maybe not the companies and exporters, but the consumers, the former actually got the benefit of benefiting everyone (if it makes prices go down and production to go up) instead of just fellow Swedes.)

But if there really is a problem and it's not allowed I can see how they totally failed regarding "certain Chinese trade practices." :D

Re:Way to prove their point! (5, Insightful)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956572)

Do you subsidize your local business, or do you dump? What is happening in China is that they are doing BOTH. Keep in mind that China belongs to IMF and WTO. They have promised to do allow their money to float, to not subsidize general trade (though apparently key tech can be), and to not dump on the open market. China breaks all of those rules. Does Sweden? Nope.

Re:Way to prove their point! (0)

Dr. Hellno (1159307) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956544)

So... don't tell us not to withhold our rare-earth minerals, because if you do, we'll withhold out rare-earth minerals?

Title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956350)

Dear title: s/to/of/

Re:Title (1)

LordKronos (470910) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956626)

You might want to make that an upper case T, or add the i flag to the end. And while you are adding flags, do NOT add the g flag (you won't like the result).

Re:Title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956742)

China Now Halting Shipments Of Rare Earth Minerals Of US?

The answer is more regulation (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956354)

Because we haven't outsourced enough to China already.

Re:The answer is more regulation (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956608)

Yeah, because environmental friendly production of environmental friendly products don't make any sense!

Maybe you should had spent your 515 billion $ military budget* and QE2 and POMO dollars on something else. Not saying it wont work, I'm no economy guy. But what if it doesn't? I can understand how paying of debt (or interest) limits economic growth.

(* But it's good that your military exist.)

Re:The answer is more regulation (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956706)

(* But it's good that your military exist.)

Yes, it's great. It's absolutely wonderful. Anytime there's a nation of little brown people we want to blow up, we can do it! Bonus points if we sell them our old weapons first so we can talk about how it's "a dangerous world" and then we can use our new weapons on them! Anybody remember Iran-Contra? Though I guess having a really short memory is a mandatory requirement of being an American, otherwise your head would explode from all your national cognitive dissonance. So maybe you don't remember that.

America doesn't punish her war criminals. Oh, no. She's much more sophisticated than that! She elects them. To high office. So their crimes become law. Then they are not crimes. Of course, they're still evil, but now they're not crimes so you can get back to your Brittney Spears and Eminem and whatever else it is that is so much more important to you than realizing what your government has become...

Its Not So bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956358)

"used in hybrid cars, wind turbines and guided missiles." In other words - US might need to halt production of Guided Missiles for a while. The other two are a non-issue.

Wal-Mart should follow suit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956364)

Halt all shipments of all Chinese products to 20k stores.

Re:Wal-Mart should follow suit (0, Troll)

zhong-guo (1872764) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956406)

yes stop the walmart from shipping out and your walmart are #1 employer in USA people are now unjobbed. You so smart, they grow turnips in the ears. We see this for years and now for the time, we will control it and we control you. It was just time. your two sided politics fight for face, and leave you in the dust. We welcome you to the new world, now xue zhong wen zai xiao xiang. Zhong Guo da, ni zen me zhe me guai. HAHAHA

Re:Wal-Mart should follow suit (1, Informative)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956492)

Number one employer in the US is the Federal Government.

Re:Wal-Mart should follow suit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956568)

Sad, isn't it? That the majority of the voting populous is working for the one thing that seeks to control them and one of the things this country was founded against...

Re:Wal-Mart should follow suit (2, Insightful)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956634)

I bet the majority of the voting populous doesn't know what the word "majority" means (as clearly you do not either).

Re:Wal-Mart should follow suit (1)

MintOreo (1849326) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956646)

Sad, isn't it? That the majority of the voting populous is working for the one thing that seeks to control them and one of the things this country was founded against...

Being the largest employer does not mean you employ the majority of the populace.

Re:Wal-Mart should follow suit (1)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956702)

It's inevitable. With the productivity increases brought about because of IT and automation, there simply are not enough jobs for everyone to work at.

Re:Wal-Mart should follow suit (1)

mirix (1649853) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956458)

Yeah, I'm sure that would work out very well for them.

Wal-mart needs cheap shit.

Tit for tat (2, Informative)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956370)

American women have large, pendulous breasts. Chinese women have small, pert breasts. Japanese women also have small, pert breasts. The difference is that Americans and Chinese have no cultural aversion to getting tattoos.

Therefore, when the tit comes to tat, the Japanese with their small, pert breasts will remain unadorned.

Americans will continue with their behemoth breasts.

Chinese will continue with their ink-filled breasts.

And everyone will be the poorer for it.

Re:Tit for tat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956426)

This is why you're one of my favourite posters. Keep up the good work.

Re:Tit for tat (1)

drsmack1 (698392) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956708)

Chinese men have small, pert penises. This is the equivalent of them buying a collective monster truck.

Re:Tit for tat (0, Offtopic)

causality (777677) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956734)

The difference is that Americans and Chinese have no cultural aversion to getting tattoos.

In America tattoos on a woman are often referred to as a "tramp stamp", especially (though not necessarily) when they occur on the lower back. The theory is that a woman who obtains a tattoo (and/or smokes) is engaging in risk-taking behavior, and that women who are willing to take risks are more likely to put out.

Right or wrong, valid or invalid, that is often the perception.

Not again... (2, Insightful)

CSFFlame (761318) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956380)

Kids, pay attention, this is how wars get started. (I'm not suggesting we are about to start lobbing nukes at each other, but this historically causes issues, see Japan and WWII)

Re:Not again... (1)

DarkXale (1771414) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956392)

All the more reason to be worried about 2012... even if the date might be off by as much as 60 days.

Re:Not again... (2, Interesting)

the_humeister (922869) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956448)

Really? I thought they were due to assassinations of archdukes and such.

Re:Not again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956530)

At least in the pacific, japan attacked because of the oil embargoes.

Of course, the embargoes were the result of japan invading china/south east asia, but in the eyes of the japanese they were just imitating the colonization activities of the western powers.

Re:Not again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956582)

You're thinking of WWI, also known as the Great War.

Re:Not again... (1)

Dragon Bait (997809) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956726)

Really? I thought they were due to assassinations of archdukes and such.

That would be WWI -- and Germany.

Re:Not again... (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956462)

Kids, pay attention, this is how wars get started.

This started over 20 years ago when the Chinese Government made rare earth metals a national priority and the US Government (and everyone else) sat on their thumbs.

The USA has been busy with oil for so long, they took their eye off a quite a few other strategic resources.

Already found them... location, location, location (2, Interesting)

ncgnu08 (1307339) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956590)

This really causes me to question our Afghanistan policy even more. We, the US Geo Survey(?), found these mass deposits of rare earth metals/minerals and, at last read I believe, the Chinese are getting the rights to actually mine and produce the metals/minerals (cit: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all [nytimes.com] ) and (for those that like more of a "story" with your "news" cit: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/06/14/discovers-t-minerals-afghanistan/ [foxnews.com] ).

Am I way off here or should we not be keeping these rights? Not being a geologist, "IANAG", maybe these are completely different metals/minerals. If they are the same I believe we have every right to mine them ourselves. We have invested more than enough into Afghanistan to justify producing these reserves.

However it now becomes very interesting with China. I think most Americans forget how close to China our military is in Afghanistan.

Can anyone enlighten me if I am missing something since IANAG.

Re:Already found them... location, location, locat (1)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956666)

Rare Earths aren't actually that rare, I've heard. It's just whether or not you have the infrastructure to refine them. And they are used in a lot of technology. Hmm... most of which comes from China anyway nowdays.

Never mind.

Re:Already found them... location, location, locat (1)

lul_wat (1623489) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956744)

>>We have invested more than enough into Afghanistan to justify producing these reserves. So put another way if you invade a country for dubious at best reasons, it justifies you stealing their mineral wealth too? Yeah. Yeaaahhhh......

Re:Already found them... location, location, locat (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956746)

Am I way off here or should we not be keeping these rights?

...

Can anyone enlighten me if I am missing something since IANAG.

Yes. You are way off. The mineral rights reside with the Afghan people and their government.

Re:Not again... (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956464)

"But no ban has been imposed on the export to Japan of semi-processed alloys that combine rare earths with other materials, the officials said. China has been trying to expand its alloy industry so as to create higher-paying jobs in mining areas, instead of exporting raw materials for initial processing."

In other words, they simply want more of the value added from minerals they export. I wouldn't worry about WWIII quite yet.

Re:Not again... (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956468)

We can win/lose this easy.

Cut off the trading ties. We'll suffer nasty. We might have a revolution. But China most definitely WILL HAVE A REVOLUTION. CPC WILL BE FUCKED.

It might help us in the end. China? It will fuck them over any way you screw it.

Re:Not again... (2, Insightful)

mirix (1649853) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956538)

Not likely. Sure, they'll definitely feel it, but china exports to the whole world. They'll survive.

In the mean time, in the US, it's going to take some time to tool up to make much more expensive replacement widgets.

Re:Not again... (0, Troll)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956594)

WRONG.

Revolution might do us some good. It will fuck up China.

We have less than 400m people in the land. China has got 1.3B.

We have oil reserve in the land. China's got squat.

It's premature for China to play hardball with us.

Obama: Make them PAY.

Re:Not again... (3, Interesting)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956696)

You're right, but I question whether it's worth it at this stage. I think a better solution right now would be to just cut off some of the trade benefits that make it so beneficial for Mainland China to continue their rapid-growth export-driven economic policies, which was a possible end state of this increased Congressional irritation about their currency manipulation.

Right now, it's not worth causing heavy damage to our economy just to hurt them more.The US is perfectly capable of pissing the CPC off just by switching recognition to the ROC government, which wouldn't break our economy and would send a nice, strong political message.

Re:Not again... (1)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956574)

Kids, pay attention, this is how wars get started. (I'm not suggesting we are about to start lobbing nukes at each other, but this historically causes issues, see Japan and WWII)

Mod parent up. If this gets to the point of stopping diplomatic communications - withdrawing ambassadors, or even a flurry of "sternly worded letters", best stock up on shit-proof paddles.

Re:Not again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956586)

Yeah, where's Curtis LeMay when we need him?

Nuclear launch detected. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956396)

I've been looking for a reason to push nuclear weapon use...this will do.

Easy solution (2, Interesting)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956404)

Close our markets to all of China's exports.

Re:Easy solution (3, Funny)

dmgxmichael (1219692) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956474)

But that would put Wal-Mart out of business!

Jokes aside, trade wars lead to shooting wars. This isn't welcome news.

Re:Easy solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956480)

Are you going to answer for the complete global economic collapse that will follow?

Re:Easy solution (-1, Troll)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956548)

The US and the rest of the world can not be held hostage by economic terrorism from China. It was unhealthy for China to get this kind of leverage over the rest of the world. it is not going to be fun to rectify the problem.

Re:Easy solution (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956620)

In your scenario it wouldn't be China holding the world hostage, it would be the US. If you haven't noticed yet, the type of embargos described in TFA have been standard operating procedure for the US for some time now.

Re:Easy solution (5, Insightful)

Jeremi (14640) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956672)

The US and the rest of the world can not be held hostage by economic terrorism from China.

Really, must everything the US doesn't like be called terrorism? China refusing to sell us every product we want may be many things, but terrorism it isn't.

Re:Easy solution (1)

izomiac (815208) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956670)

Complete economic collapse? That hardly seems likely, or even possible for a sustained period. Realistically, the US losing 3.7% of its exports and 10.5% of its imports will hurt a lot. China losing the ~40% (IIRC) of their GDP that comes from trade with western nations will be catastrophic for them. Plus there's the fact that the US exports food to China. OTOH, you should play nice when you're the weaker player.

Re:Easy solution (4, Insightful)

icegreentea (974342) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956564)

How could this possibly be modded interesting? Do you really wish to flog yourself to death? You know all those reasons why you couldn't just stop buying chinese goods for the last 5 years? Well, every single one of them still applies. The damage you would wreck upon yourself, especially in the short term would be orders of magnitudes greater than the damage caused by a rare earth metal shortage.

Perhaps if you suggested a more limited or symbolic ban/tariff then it may work.

But seriously, everyone knows by now that China and American are stuck. Breaking out of the current relationship would fuck both of you up. And China has way more slack than the US does to fuck around and be an abusive boyfriend. And everyone saw that coming to.

Re:Easy solution (5, Insightful)

drgould (24404) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956578)

Close our markets to all of China's exports.

You don't have to close our markets, just impose a 10% to 20% across the board import tariff on all manufactured goods.

Actually, we should take away their MFN (most favored nation) trading status. They never deserved it in the first place.

Re:Easy solution (2, Insightful)

nedlohs (1335013) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956688)

And then where does the Federal Government borrow the money to rollover expiring treasuries, let along fund current spending?

Same old, same old (-1, Troll)

Chicken_Kickers (1062164) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956410)

Before every flag waving murrican scream USA! USA! USA!, your country do it too. In this case, it is against Iran. You can read it here: http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/Iran-Confirms-Refueling-Problems-for-Some-of-Its-Planes-in-Europe-105276043.html [voanews.com]. So, how does it feel to be on the receiving end for a change? Not very nice, is it?

Re:Same old, same old (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956496)

..and Iran wants to push its own agenda too: islamification of the world.. a return to ignorance for the sake of power and cultural control. They're not blameless either.

Re:Same old, same old (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956596)

Trade restrictions are nothing new.. the reason us murrican's are screaming USA! USA! USA! and 'investigating chinese trade practices', is because China is a WTO member state which prevents them from doing things like this, and from us putting teriffs on all Chinese goods.

Personally I love that they are trying to play this card.. nothing could benefit the US lower and middle classes more than destroying the WTO.

a trade war? good (5, Insightful)

brxndxn (461473) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956436)

Nothing gets the American economy going like a good challenge..

Foreign companies invest in China. Then, China creates a Chinese alternative.. state-run.. state-subsidized.. copying the foreign model. Only.. China manipulates their currency for an export advantage. China keeps their middle class underpaid (while the government hordes money). And safety? Safety costs money.. Harming an American worker is more expensive than keeping him safe.. In China, harm a Chinese worker.. and replace him with one of the horde.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-LLsODnuHI [youtube.com]

As American consumers, we pay less for cheap plastic crap now.. at the expense of our jobs and quality..

And Walmart leads the way.. fastest from store shelves to landfills.

Re:a trade war? good (4, Interesting)

cappp (1822388) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956632)

I read an article [foreignpolicy.com] yesterday which dealt exactly with that point and the author noted

Somehow these successes from America's last great trade war have been forgotten -- blotted out by patriotic sloganeering ("American industry pulled up its socks to meet the Japanese challenge)"

. The writer pretty much argues that the last trade war wasn't really won at all,

Most U.S. producers never recovered what they lost in the 1980s. In fact, the question of just who beat whom in the last great trade war has no easy answer. Consider this: Japanese GDP growth from 1990 to 2000 -- Japan's so-called lost decade -- was just 0.2 percent less than America's when you account for increases in the U.S. population. And Japan comes out ahead on a per capita basis. Even with the battering it took, Japan's productivity growth outpaced that of U.S. workers in the 1990s.

and even that limited success was more a factor of specific global issues and not because of American industry. Give it a read, it makes an interesting argument.

Re:a trade war? good (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956698)

except it ignores the fact that American business decided to dismantle US operations to move them over seas so it really isn't a demonstrative decade for the author's point at all.

Re:a trade war? good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956740)

Taxes on the other guy's imports do not a "real challenge" make.

Trade relations game theory (1)

Invisible Now (525401) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956452)

I remember an academic study, trying to find it, that established that the optimal strategy in trade relations turns out to be simple tit for tat. if your trading partner cooperates you cooperate. If they defect - you defect until they return to a tactic of cooperation.

What tactic do we think the Chinese government is currently employing?

Re:Trade relations game theory (1)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956478)

The best is tit for tat with a forgiveness strategy.

Otherwise an inevitable communication problem results in pure tit for tat turning destructive with no way to recover.

Re:Trade relations game theory (2, Insightful)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956546)

It sounds like you're thinking of some variant of the prisoner's dilemma [wikipedia.org], which is a classic, basic example of a non-zero-sum game.

Re:Trade relations game theory (1)

VValdo (10446) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956712)

It sounds like you're thinking of some variant of the prisoner's dilemma, which is a classic, basic example of a non-zero-sum game.

A STRANGE GAME.
THE ONLY WINNING MOVE IS
NOT TO PLAY [youtube.com].

HOW ABOUT A NICE GAME OF CHESS?
--Joshua

Re:Trade relations game theory (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956614)

that is basic game theory.

China made the first move with their currency. We tat back with the pressure to let their currency float on the market. They hit back with an embargo, so we have to hit back with a complete market shutdown.

China has to come back to cooperation.

Re:Trade relations game theory (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956700)

> What tactic do we think the Chinese government is currently employing?

I think the economic success has gone to some heads, high up. Their imagined leverage is far higher than their actual real life leverage. The speed of their escalation towards trade war (I mean the tariff kind, not the shooting kind) is as much of an indicator of poor snap decisions as the decisions themselves. China is more dependent on trade than anyone else right now; for them to trigger problems here right now is insane.

In the span of about a week, they're managing to piss off their ENTIRE rare earth market all at once. Ruining decades worth of work towards trying to convince everyone that the Chinese supply is cheap and reliable. Potentially triggering everyone else to restart their mines - with long term barriers to Chinese suppliers. A backfire in which, at the very least, China destroys decades of its own hard work.

I mean, damn. Even oil-producing nations don't have as much leverage as China is acting like it has here.

are they that clueless ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956466)

Look for the politicians to unite against a common straw man. Look for Japan to start leasing mines in the US and have them up and running within 2 years. Also look for really cheap toyotas as a result. Also look for China to get really fucked over during the same time period.

Wow, it wasn't just a dream (-1, Redundant)

KlomDark (6370) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956476)

One night when I was young, and stayed up too late watching Happy Days, I had a strange dream that God told me that I would be blessed with the ability to know that the true end times had come, and my way of knowing would be that when Tom Bosley died, the end game maneuver had arrived.

Then I woke up and thought, "Hmmm, that was pretty stupid."

But now I see that my precognition was correct.

How odd.

Re:Wow, it wasn't just a dream (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956580)

As far as religions go, this sounds pretty rational.

Where do I sign up to send you money and get the newsletter Low Ranked Craig mentioned?

Typo in title (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956490)

Typo in title:

China Now Halting Shipments To Rare Earth Minerals To US

Should read:

China Now Halting Shipments of Rare Earth Minerals To US

Hindsight is 20/20... (3, Insightful)

UnixUnix (1149659) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956500)

...but even so, was it THAT difficult for a number of US Administrations to realize the strategic inportance of rare earths, instead of standing idle while US production dwindled into nothingness? So now, hello urban mining. Good thing I still have my old cell phones, they might fetch a price.

Go go gadget capitalism! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956508)

The Free Market would solve this! Oh.......

kick them out (2, Insightful)

Ryanrule (1657199) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956528)

of the wto. they should never have been allowed in.

Re:kick them out (1)

Jeremi (14640) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956714)

of the wto. they should never have been allowed in

Kicking China out of the World Trade Organization would be like kicking all the American teams out of the NFL.

Goodbye, Chinks... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956558)

It was nice knowing you.

Do as I say (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956584)

Didn't Hu Jintao condemn protectionism? Or maybe he condemned non-Chinese protectionism. It's amazing how a country who refuses to open it's books to external scrutiny and gets pissed when other countries "interfere" with supposed internal affairs, such as freedom of speech have no qualms about sticking their nose into other countries affairs and is critical of how they run their countries..,,

Lo and behold (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956598)

Afghanistan just happens to have the largest reserve of Lithium

http://news.discovery.com/earth/afghanistan-minerals-lithium.html

We should take that country over!!.... oh....

I, for one, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956602)

. . . welcome our new Chinese overlords.

response (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33956652)

Massive preemptive thermonuclear strike: (1) cool the earth (2) restore US manufacturing jobs (3) eliminate worldwide demand for diminishing oil reserves (4) restore unhindered access to neodynium for Prius motors

Environmentalism (4, Interesting)

peterindistantland (1487953) | more than 3 years ago | (#33956678)

China's rare earth supply should be boycotted anyway, because of the massive pollution caused by their unregulated mining practice.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...