I can't understand geopolitics

Ask some questions that you might have, we will flesh it out for you

Ecoute Soral

Everyone is biased, so you can't trust them. I can't trust journalists either

Just learn about what the interests of each country is and how they go about in achieving them. That's literally it.

Also there are no """"""""""friends"""""""""" in politics. Only countries with similar goals.

>frogs in charge of critical thinking
Literally every one of the meme philosophers you had to study in school were overtly biased, yet you still managed to learn something from their works. Read articles from a diverse range of sources, then combine them to form your model of the truth.

Which newspaper would you recommend to read ? I read LeMonde and Bloomberg

NYT
Wall Street Journal
The Economist
The Spectator (UK)
Lawfare
Breitbart
National Review Online

Actually the last three are very US-focused so most of the articles won't interest you. But they also cover major international news (e.g. the Iran deal) so they're worth an occasional visit.

Also, stay away from the Opinion/Editorial section of every news outlet. They're *always* a complete waste of time.

>Breitbart
>Reliable news source

Pick one

me neither
and i feel its boring

its basically alt-rights vs minorities/commies i think.

It's quite simple. Everyone tries to maximize their power and wealth, as the Canadian also said.

China is trying to aggresively expand, while avoiding confrontation with the west. But China has no problem claiming territories from Japan, India and other neighbors who are weaker than them.
The EU is trying to draw power to itself, even if it means causing an internal conflict to do so.
The USA tries to police the world, with Iran and North Korea being the biggest military threat. All other countries is more about securing American interests.
Russia has a history of being invaded by the west, so they worry about bordering NATO, so if Ukraine joins NATO there won't be a bufferzone anymore, so they secure strategic points in Ukraine.
The middle east is divided into Sunni muslims who support the west (Turkey, Saudi Arabia), Israel and Shia Muslims who support Russia (Iran). And terrorists who are a political tool of both sides.
The United Nations is a discussion platform for nations, but because the USA veto's everything and Russia lies about everything and China doesn't care its a toothless tiger.

The goal of the EU is federalization. So if something like a refugee crisis happens that's a perfect excuse for it. An excuse to raise their own taxes (so they can manage their own budget) and an excuse for a shared military.

at least i can say you dont know shit about asian geopol

chinks only do that shit in sea. they ridicule sk sometimes and threaten taiwan but its their best in ea

>they only do it at sea
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_border_dispute

>they literally have a military standoff over a road
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_China–India_border_standoff

only Kanaken like that guy

The oil industry is too important to be controlled by political conflicts. Because countries run on oil and gas. If the oil and gas would stop, then war happens.
Japan for example also invaded Indonesia (which was from The Netherlands) when we stopped supplying oil.

And oil is paid in dollars which results in a high demand for dollars. This makes foreign goods very cheap for Americans. As America is an import economy this is especially useful.
So, if countries stop trading oil in dollars (which would mean there will be less demand for the dollar) then the USA would experience lots of inflation. And everything would become more expensive. That's the doom scenario anyway.
So countries that want to get rid of the oil dollar are also enemies of the USA.

it doesn't matter
just mind your own business and you'll be fine

chinks vs poos stuff is not only that and its lasted so long. both see it as a historical/cultural problem..

a bit more specifically speaking, its not a "new problem". its a long standing problem. both cant take a concrete action cause it would be messy. both wont cross a red line

I've found there are 3 basic rules you can almost always rely on.
1. Politicians always lie
2. Given the chance, any given politician will seize as much money and power for themselves as they possibly can, no matter who they have to fuck in the process
3. The above also applies to any sufficiently large business owner, lobbyist or union official.
Keeping these three rules in mind helps explain the motivations behind pretty much every major player in national and global politics and most of the actual political scenarios we see today (the wars and so on) stem from the actions of a politician following those rules.

>breitbart
>national review
>not the FT

Check out the BBC or even our own ABC for a reliable, if anglocentric summary of major world events. Both outlets make a habit of providing a barebones accounting of just the known facts without any assumptions or editorialising and thus make an excellent start on which to base research into a given story.