My point is that all of the world's greater goals to combat climate change are ****ed anyway unless something changes in China due to the sheer gulf in output between them and everyone else. The United States is a non-factor in comparison, bar utilizing their military power or leading the way in additional sanctions.

Americans be playing six degrees of separation from China being behind the root of all their problems to distract themselves from the stench of their rotting empire.

What's the point if it isn't going to move the needle? The U.S. is already pushing forward their own internal goals to lower their emissions footprint. Is anyone else going to?

I read the Der Stürmer article too and it's blatantly false.

And moving the needle for two.

Nice try Boris.

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54719577

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/eac...-co2-emissions

https://rhg.com/research/chinas-emis...ped-countries/

It isn't misleading. If their population size is the problem, then that's all the more reason for them to be the #1 priority as far as the U.N. is concerned. If the goal is to actually reverse the trends we are seeing in climate change, you need to start with the country producing the most pollution and work your way down. At the same time, the U.S., EU and India should change their consumption practices to accelerate that process.

Way to continually ignore that their emissions are largely derived from american industrial outsourcing.

Say, is this "China" in the room with us right now?

Wrong. It's because they burn ****loads of coal and all the construction they do, all of which is domestic.

Changing who the U.S. decides to source from is pointless unless you can change the way that other countries actually produce things. This isn't hard to understand.

I can stop buying potato chips tomorrow and those potato chip companies will just find someone else to sell to.

I'm well aware of the propaganda but you can repeat it a few more times if you want.