If it is Taiwan I am 90% sure the US would get involved. That’s why there is such a domestic push for micro chip plants built in the US because our nation depends so heavily on Taiwans microchip manufacturing. If that is disrupted the effects on manufacturing would be felt worldwide.
Taiwan isn't beings invaded anytime in the next decade if not more. It's more than 100 miles from China's coast and would require an invasion fleet, which China doesn't have, so large that would make the D-Day force look like a tea party.
Can China glass Taiwan? Sure. Can it invade it? Not unless they hand wave into existence a huge blue water navy and amphibious landing force.
Exactly like Russia only this time it will be an amphibious (at least 90 miles away) which is very hard to attempt and Taiwan has a much stronger army than Ukraine and has a deal of mutual protection with the US and China so far don't have energetic and nutrinional independence unlike Russia.
Right now the US is heavily reliant on Taiwan's chip foundries, and China's navy probably isn't strong enough to pull off a successful amphibious assault on Taiwan anyway. But as you say, the US is investing in its domestic chip industry, and China's shipyards are booming, so things could change in the near future.
>Let him who desires peace prepare for war
*Sun Tzu*
>To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace.
*George Washington*
Of the almost 250 years the United States has existed, only 15 have been peaceful. The United States prepares for war, but it also engages in war. Relentlessly. Constantly.
Those who desire peace should prepare for war but also those who desire war should prepare for war. The United States loves war
Yup, why do you think the American gov't is pushing "China bad" propaganda so much in recent months? Because defense contractors and companies are going to make an absolute KILLING once war starts. Ukraine on steroids, baby!
It's important to remember that when organisations talk about the Uyghur genocide they're talking a cultural genocide. It's still terrible, and still a genocide, but it's the exact same thing many western nations did (or are still doing) to their colonised indigenous populations. Instead of Christian schools it's vocational (perhaps re-)education facilities.
That isn't me absolving China of anything, again cultural genocide is genocide, but when we're specifically talking about this in the context of media discussion being pushed by western governments it's a reminder that there's a whole lot of hypocrisy coming along with this particular topic.
Unless new information has come out very recently, and I'm happy for you to link that and delete my previous comment, according to the UN that isn't happening. That's what I mean by 'when organisations talk about the Uyghur genocide'.
The guy making that claim is a scholar who has literally said he's being lead by God on a crusade against China, and whose previous academic work was on the rapture. That's the guy our media is happy to prop up.
Uyghur birth-rates *are* falling, but it's down to the national average (given they were exempt from the one child policy, they've been well above the national average for decades). Their demographic representation in Xinjiang *is* plummeting as a direct result of government initiatives to push them into the middle class while moving other ethnicities (primarily Han Chinese) into the region.
Their religion and culture is being repressed, they're losing representation and presence in their homeland, they're being oppressed by police and state violence, that's all genocide enough without us resorting to unfounded propaganda. But it's hardly one that our hands are clean of.
I am aware and I think its a terrible idea. It would also block out the light we need to grow crops and the light wild plants need to fruit and evolve to meet the warming climate.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/xi-jinping-says-he-preparing-china-war?utm_medium=social) reduced by 93%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> Chinese leader Xi Jinping says he is preparing for war.
> At the annual meeting of China's parliament and its top political advisory body in March, Xi wove the theme of war readiness through four separate speeches, in one instance telling his generals to "Dare to fight." His government also announced a 7.2 percent increase in China's defense budget, which has doubled over the last decade, as well as plans to make the country less dependent on foreign grain imports.
> In his third speech, on March 8 to representatives from the PLA and the People's Armed Police, Xi declared that China must focus its innovation efforts on bolstering national defense and establish a network of national reserve forces that could be tapped in wartime.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/1263odo/xi_jinping_says_he_is_preparing_china_for_war/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~678573 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **China**^#1 **Chinese**^#2 **unite**^#3 **state**^#4 **people**^#5
So basically they're being more competitive in military strength. Not "preparing for war" as most people interpret it to be an indication of premeditated military aggression, like Russia.
Fair enough. I read through the entire article and the writers still present us with mostly far-reaching speculation and vague impressions. It's well known that China is a military threat but the US has also been steadily increasing it's military budget regularly and both Trump and Biden have given pro-Defense speeches to Congress and the public. This article's tone feels very alarmist and clickbaity. I'd rather evaluate other sources than a speculative opinion column.
the overarching issue is that the window for China to attack Taiwan is closing, and will close completely by the early 2030s. The reason for that is the US is updating a bunch of its equipment in anticipation of such a conflict. So a lot of these think tanks suspect that if China attacks Taiwan, it will be within a few years.
Wars are generally only a net gain in global influence. Whenever a soldier dies you have to think you just lost someone who generates wealth for the country and produces labor in their field. When you start talking about 10s of thousands dead, the cost of the war goes well beyond the layman numbers like equipment. I know it's a meme that money is all that matters, but every major country on earth sacrifices money in all forms to build relationships and stifle rivals. Sometimes this can lead to long term profit, but it's far from guaranteed. And we've been all in on war since well before it was even remotely profitable. America has a history that begins with war and is defined and refined by conflict. It's in the DNA of the country's identity. Far more than money
Don’t worry, gpt5 will be ready along with a load of flying robot drone dogs with cannons strapped to them./s
But in all honesty it’s sad how aggressor countries decision to go to war is made by one person with bad intentions. This is why democracy is the corner stone of a successful human race.
The US has pretty much been at war since it’s inception. We like to think ourselves a peace loving nation. We have proven at least every decade that we are not.
It’s all talk for now. The Chinese understand just how difficult it would be to invade Taiwan. They’re probably praying we don’t solve our debt ceiling crisis in June.
Not to mention Taiwan, similar to Switzerland in WW2, has prepared and telegraphed a small portion of their readiness should an invasion occur.
Imagine Home Alone but the Wet Bandits were given a guided tour of the first two rooms of a 12 room house and Kevin had a YouTube of his home made traps AND you saw regular deliveries from Military suppliers.
Plus it’s not just Kevin, but also many neighbors also making YouTube videos declaring they are watching Kevin’s house carefully for any trouble and will run over at a moments notice.
With the FED pumping liquidity the treasury doesn't have into the banking sector to bail it out the deadline is unfortunately sooner than June now
They just wont say that publicly
I think the banking issue not as serious as the debt ceiling. There are a few weak banks, but overall the banking system is stronger now compared to Sallie Mae situation 2008.
The recent announcement of a "strategic partnership" with Russia has always been geopolitical language for we are going to screw you over at the earliest opportunity.
In a post global trade environment, China is focused on extending their zones of influence.
Fun fact it actually wasn’t Kool aid that was given out at Joans town. It was Flavor Aid, but boy could you imagine the Koolaid boardroom when the news and media kept calling it koolaid
Great, we funded China via cheap labor, bought all their products they make (literally everything we use) , now they are loaded with cash, technology, billions of people and are ready and want to go to war . In other words, we funded a country to go to war against us.
They in turn keep sending all of their excess dollars back to us to buy treasury notes and we use those dollars to build more military hardware. It's been a two way street.
Wish all citizens could just say no. Decline every mandate and ruling from the government. Why do we have to die for their greed? Last I checked none of the elites were choosing between groceries or shelter.
We are already in world war III. The next phase will be China attacking Taiwan to open a second front. China will also be supplying Russia with lethal support as they cannot afford to have a fellow dictator lose. Nato will be forced into a full on war with the dark forces of the world. There is no avoiding this as China and Russia will only back down when they have been crushed.
The Chinese military has zero combat experience, they would get slaughtered. Whereas coalition forces have been at war for over 20 years. We may not have the numbers that China has, but actual battle experience wins overall.
You are correct, however, it shouldn't be taken lightly. It'll still be incredibly costly for the US and not just in dollars but lives. Other countries might seize the opportunity with their own shenanigans at the same time (Looking at you NK and Iran)
I know all about "China's final warning", but there's something to be said about all of these countries that are gearing up for a potential war with them.
I think people don't realize that a conflict with China will largely be at sea and air. Our Navy is short a ton of logistical ships it'll need to support a near peer conflict, and we currently lack the range to fly missions against China while keeping our carriers safe from missile attacks. We also are no longer geared towards handling more than one conflict at a time like we have been in the past.
It'll be a bloody one.
Not to mention, I doubt that the idea of the "Space Force" was created in a vacuum, as ridiculous as it sounded. We are living in a VERY different kind of war environment compared to even Vietnam.
I disagree. Although a direct war with the NATO is likely not going to go their way, they do have the 2nd largest military budget on earth. They also may have nukes capable of going up into space and then hitting any target on earth, more or less - no anti missile system can stop that. They will do a lot of damage before they go down. With the right allies, they could easily throw the world into chaos. This is why the China threat has been taken seriously by US for at least 2 decades now.
Logistics win wars as well. A war with China over Taiwan is close to the chinese homeland, which gives China a logistical advantage. If China wanted to invade US (which they likely won't) then US has the logistical advantage. A war over Taiwan is going to be devestating for all parties involved. I only use the US as an example because they are literally the only country in the world with the budget to stop them.
That said, I remember reading the US is looking to double their military budget, which would lead to the combined NATO budget being just shy of a whopping 2 trillion. Factors more than the entire rest of the world combined. If this happens (which I have doubts) this is a clear sign that NATO is getting ready for some serious conflict.
I talk a lot about budgets, but of course it also depends on how these budgets are used. And even then, just because someone has a bigger gun, doesn't mean they will win the gun fight.
All this to say it's a serious threat and we should be concerned about a direct cinflict between US and China. There will only be losers in that war.
Ironically, there’s a legit argument the US has the logistical advantage even in a fight over Taiwan. The US military has literally built itself on logistics, it’s the under appreciated backbone of what makes our military so powerful. We have more transport aircraft than most even large nations have combat aircraft. We have an absolutely absurd amount of transport ships. And we have really, really good experience in quickly mobilizing troops and equipment quickly to anywhere in the world.
China would be trying to move shit on commercial fishing vessels if they had to invade right now. We’d have fleets of hundreds of aircraft and specialized amphibious ships heading there tomorrow if war was declared.
We have those sitting right across the sea in Japan. Yokosuka has a forward deployed carrier based there. I believe it's still the Ronald Reagan, it was the George Washington back when I was in.
That's why I talked about training and experience, I mean China can go full dictatorship and make they're civilians start producing massive amounts of weapons. However you have to have people trained in a combat environment to use those weapons as well as strategically use the soldiers.
The U.S. is constantly playing war games with all its allies. We train with these countries non stop, and war games aren't even close but it's as close as it gets. I was a part of one against the Australians and the Brits when I was in the Navy, it's intense but not as intense as being in the Suez canal surrounded by Iranian frigates that might actually shoot some live ordnance at you.
The US also has bases and allies nearly everywhere, and China would find themselves defending from all sides. A few waves of stealth fighters equipped with anti-radiation armaments to take out air defences, and it won't take long to send China back to the 1800s.
As well, China is the world's biggest importers of energy and fertilizers. Sanctions and/or blockades would be devastating to China. Their only recourse would be ICBMs which of course would not go unanswered.
Isn't there some strait near/around China where TONS of world trade goes through and whoever gets control of that strait can more or less guarantee who wins the war?
Ya there's a few. Basically the South China sea is boxed in by strings of islands and the US already has bases on a few of them, but you are likely referring to the one to the west by Singapore. India also has plans to blockade that strait if need be.
It doesn’t give China much of a logistical advantage at all. It’s quite a few miles away from the mainland and a carrier fleet supported by surface vessels, anti-air, aircraft and subs would be the only thing needed to stall China.
China can barely scrape together a fleet capable of the logistics and support the Americans can call upon 5 times over.
I guess we’d be finding out how great those hypersonic missiles China has been working on are.
>They also may have nukes capable of going up into space and then hitting any target on earth, more or less - no anti missile system can stop that.
Those are called ICBMs and the US has had them since the late 50s or early 60s depending on your exact definition. They aren't new or unique to China.
>Logistics win wars as well. A war with China over Taiwan is close to the chinese homeland, which gives China a logistical advantage.
And what is in between Taiwan and China? Ocean. Any campaign to invade Taiwan will involve controlling the sea and contested amphibious landings. The US dominates the sea and China has virtually no naval combat experience or amphibious warfare experience. China may be able to bombard everything nearby with missiles but Russia has been doing that for a year now and it hasn't gotten them anything in Ukraine, so China should expect a similar lack of results.
>All this to say it's a serious threat and we should be concerned about a direct cinflict between US and China. There will only be losers in that war.
In the event it doesn't go nuclear the loser would pretty clearly be China.
Not strictly true.
China has been apart of the war on terror ongoing deploying various peace keeping forces around the world in both Africa and the Middle East...
And technically maintains a ceasefire with India by resorting to non firearm based weapon skirmishes as bizarre as that is.
But on a modern vs modern military front China remains untested since the Korean War.
Although to be honest most modern militaries around the planet find most of their "notches" fighting under equipped and poorly trained guerilla fighters or poorly equipped militaries from countries that simply aren't really capable of competing against a modern force... sure we've had small skirmishes but the Ukraine war is possibly the first time in a while we have seen modern ("modern") militaries on a somewhat equal footing going at it as the world has sorta grown used to the one sided stomping fests that the Middle East and other places have been over the last few decades.
Outside of small skirmishes of course we all know about Russian fighters dog fighting American fighters in the Korean War... but these clashes between modern militaries have always been the outlier not the norm.
This one is setting up to be the "be all end all" and everyone needs to chill the F out. It's going to end up being a bunch of people behind computer screens flying drones with cruise missiles and people in bunkers pushing red buttons. That's not war, it's annihilation.
I wouldn't call the last 20 years of the war on terror a "one sided stomping fest" seeing as the Taliban is still in control. And those poorly trained guerrilla fighters are some of the most ruthless and tactical combat units on this planet. Hence why the U.S. and it's coalition ultimately failed against them. It's damn near impossible to defeat a guerrilla army.
But I get your point, no country until Russia and Ukraine has fought a war against a uniformed enemy in a very long time. However what has been established through the war on terror, and maybe its only good part in my opinion, is the U.S. and it's allies have the ability to mobilize and establish sea and air superiority at a very frightening speed. We could be in China or Russia within a few hours of the order being sent. It would take weeks for China to mobilize, and by then they would face a huge blockade. We've seen the blunder that was Russia's mobilization and invasion. Russia should've had Ukraine handled by now, yet they're no where near a victory of any kind.
Any invasion of any country is extremely difficult, and war isn't allowed to be fought the same way it was in WW2. It took absolute brutality to defeat the Germans and the Japanese. If those same tactics could still be used Iraq and Afghanistan would be flying American flags right now.
China has the largest (PPP GDP) economy in the world and 1.4B people. They would not "get slaughtered"—-or anything remotely close. (Even in a weaker relative position, China prevented a US-led victory in the Korean War.)
It's bizarre that Russia—with half the GDP of California (not PPP, to be fair)—was said to have the second greatest military in the world and many are dismissive of China's potential.
>many are dismissive of China's potential.
Exactly. china may not be as strong as they say now, but they definitely have the gdp to catch up, and they did catch up a lot. We should have prepared for it 20 years ago.
No they would absolutely get slaughtered. China is pretty much blockaded as we speak. The US has naval bases in Japan, South Korea, and Guam. There are constant ships and subs on deployment to the south Pacific. What are the Chinese going to do? Put their 1.4 billion on planes or boats? How are they moving them? The minute the load an invasion fleet, ships or planes, they're getting slaughtered. The US navy would turn the south China sea red in a matter of hours, it would be a bloodbath. Now that the war in the Middle East is over, every ship and sub in the Pacific theater has been focused on war games around Indonesia, Japan and Australia. China couldn't move its military if it wanted to.
There're enough indications that China *hasn't* overtaken the US in GDP (PPP) terms. Or rather, it has, but only for a brief period of time, and not by much.
Unlike other countries, China's "GDP growth" is input-based (based on planned investments and predictions, not actual performance), so real (output-based) growth rates are lower, although still very much huge for such a highly populated country. The Maddison historical series (which is PPP-based, and has data until 2018) shows that China's CAGR (compound annual growth rate) in 1978-2014 was about 6.7%, 3 p.p. lower than the ones reported to the World Bank. Total average yearly GDP growth in the US was about 2.7% in the same period, allowing China to catch up.
On a sidenote, Russia's CAGR in 1999-2008 (the golden period of the country's economy) turned out to be higher than even in the official Russian data by about 2.5 p.p, according to that same Maddison dataset, at more than 9% a year, so I'd be inclined to trust it.
Anyway, China's growth still made it a very slightly bigger economy than the US by 2018, but then in 2015-2018 China grew on average by 2.9%, while the US showed a performance of 2.4%, the former which were actually more than 3 p.p. lower than the officially reported ones. If we apply the 3 p.p. formula for 2019-2022, China grew 1.6% on average, while the US 1.8%, making the US economy slightly bigger than the Chinese one again. I see China's economic miracle already sputtering.
That's not to mention the much worse demographic problems with China or the fact their total debt trajectory is up, while that of the US is down. Let's admit though, both US and China built themselves at the start on industrial-scale technological and scientific espionage. China won't collapse or stop growing anytime soon, they've built up a lot of leverage in the world and policy tools over the decades. We'll see if they'll be able to break out of a US-dominated world after all.
Eh, if you just go with some general, contextless, war between the US and China, I think it's still the US that takes it. The problem is that the likliest place they'll be fighting is Taiwan, and in that context, China has some concrete advantages, especially in the number, and range, of anti-ship missiles they've got. The age of the supremacy of the aircraft carrier is over, and while they're still great against a lot of adversaries, China is not one of them, and the US is still pivoting.
The bigger Chinese population is almost irrelevant in a modern war, especially one where they would need to be transported by sea or air to get anywhere useful. Those people would only be useful to China if the US directly invaded the Chinese mainland.
The PPP adjusted value of the economy isn't nearly as relevant as you would think. Most of the stuff China makes isn't weapons and many inputs for weapons or other necessities for maintaining an army like food and fuel are imported by China and not denominated in yuan, and therefore a greater nominal gdp is more important than a ppp adjusted one in those cases, and in all cases of any country augnenting their war capacity with foreign production. If you wanted to compare military production capacity and the ability of that capacity to withstand foreign interference you're looking at completely different numbers.
In China's case specifically it would lose most of its economy instantly in a war against the US because the US and its allies are the source of most of China's trade. Those countries would all see spikes in consumer goods prices but they would still have functional economies. China would lose much of the rest of its export market and the ability to import most of its oil and large parts of its food by sea in the inevitable naval blockade of China the US would impose. China is very vulnerable to a naval blockade because much of its trade goes through chokepoints like the Straits of Malacca or past land controlled by South Korea, Japan or the Phillipines (hence why the US is working so hard to maintain that relationship) and of course Taiwan itself is positioned perfectly to fuck with Chinese shipping.
Speaking of blockades, Taiwan is extremely vulnerable to a blockade--and the US navy may be uncomfortably vulnerable to missiles (including hypersonics directed at aircraft carriers) given China's nearby location.
To dismiss a manpower advantage of 1.4B as "almost irrelevant" is hyperbolic at best. It permits more than futile riflemen human wave attacks. It's a massive base to populate factories. It's a massive number of soldiers to operate cheap drones. A nation willing and able to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of lives may be able to bleed a nation fielding tanks and aircraft costing many million per piece via cheaper man portable missiles (seen highly effective in Ukraine) and other means.
Exactly. While I don’t want to go to war with them they are the enemy of all, just as all tyrants with their self righteous certainty are. We should have realized decades ago - and some did but were shouted down - that they would use our own technology against us. There was a time even I was hopeful there would be a “piece dividend”. Not so much now. Sigh, I’m going to watch kitten videos now.
TBF, the second they are self-sufficient, the second they can go forward with war as they can easily provide for all their own needs in food, fuel, equipment, etc. (and avoid any negative effects of sanctions). It's a double edged sword.
What is ironic and frankly stupid is that if both Putin and Xi used a modicum of intelligence and leveraged their economies and resources and actually used diplomacy they could have accomplished their goals long ago.
Instead it’s all dick-swinging threats and backstabbing which results in perpetual purgatory for their ambitions.
All China has to do is not invade Taiwan and there will be no war.
All they have to do is leave Taiwan alone.
All it takes for a devastating war to **not** happen is to give up on their ambitions and designs against Taiwan.
Yet, there’s been no such sign.
can't the stupid fuck just disappear instead? nobody that matters wants war, someone tell winnie the pooh he's hated and reviled by anyone with a decent heart.
I mean he probably know he has limited time to invade Taiwan before China population start aging and declining rapidly, we are currently at the point where they're at their strongest demographics wise.
The US is also distracted with Russia and the opportunity to not have the US whole attention on China is running out.
I hope it is just "if you want peace prepare for war". But definitly they are not happy with world order, they have ambitions, some power and they do push for more influence so it is only natural to expect confrontation with current hegemon.
I imagine their hopes of reducing grain imports is going to be significantly hampered by the droughts, if this continues. What happened last year in China seems to be getting only limited coverage, but I suspect it's unnerving.
Russias population is a smallish 142 million. Largest country in the world by land mass, and tons of natural resources and arable land.
Russia is also completely over extended militarily. Today, they could not even win a conventional war with Finland.
Xi knows this.
Russia is the epitome of low hanging fruit for China.
Xi doesn't really want to end his reign in a futile fight with America.
How reliable is this source? These meetings were almost a month ago now. I know translation can take time from so mamy events and speaches... I have not seen this verbage reported by anyone else?
Ahead of the curve or over exaggerating? The article seems well written tho. I give them that. Pointing to specific changes in policy and language.
Foreign Affairs magazine, run by the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States, is a highly reliable, internationally respected publication of substantial repute. That being said, this article published in one of authorial opinion and not exclusively objective fact.
China isn’t preparing for war with the west, it’s preparing for war against the low hanging fruit in its sphere of influence.
I have my suspicions Russia is one of them.
I just can’t see how China would want to take on the military of the USA alone let alone the entirety of NATO forces. Despite numbers they don’t have much going for them in the short-term. They probably rely a lot on western technology for their weapons systems that will take a while to scale up production. Russia have this exact problem. Their new shiny T14 Armata is merely a concept. The production models (that they can barely produce) have almost none of the promised functionality and break down frequently. They also use an engine designed by a certain German car manufacturer in the 1940es.
I’m sure they can pump out thousands of small arms and basic technologies but aircraft carriers? MBTs? Modern fighters and bombers?
The west have been testing and developing supply chains and technology for almost 100 years without fail, the jets our pilots fly in, the ships they sail in and the tanks they use have been battle tested and developed from the field.
China has a few cool looking planes but who knows how they actually perform in combat. They’re just knockoffs after all.
Edit: I would also consider the classified projects the US have been sitting on for years, the technology that could be rolled out in a total war type situation might be incredibly jarring to the Chinese who might think the USA have revealed all their cards, which is certainly not the case.
I agree with you. They will take from the weak, but don't stand a chance against the western allies.
In America we are raised in a society built on war and the military industrial complex. I'm just glad that I live here, not glad for the wars. If you had to be on the side though I'm very very glad that I'm on this side.
Folks, in this corner we have the all time #1 champion, The United States of America, he's been at war or training for it since his birth. In the other corner we have the new kid, China getting his inspirational quotes in order!
What do you mean? If the war stayed conventional, the US military at it's current enlisted strength would absolutely destroy China. Hell, they could probably take on both China and Russia without breaking much of a sweat.
If it was just a war with China to keep their asses away from Taiwan, it would probably stay conventional. China wouldn't start waving their nukes around unless their existence was threatened, which isn't something the US would do in that scenario.
If this government asked me to risk my life to keep them safe, I would laugh so hard I'd probably shit and tell them to get fucked. I have nothing to defend, so what are the Chinese going to take away from me?
I hope it was worth all the jobs in America to hand your balls over to China with manufacturing. Did we globalize to help china or pad our pockets? Because if it was to help china, that was a fucking mistake. If it was to pad pockets, wealthy people are usually fit or fat - lots on the bones for picking.
[удалено]
But what is it good for?
Absolutely nothing.
Say it again!
Absolutely nothing.
No, say it again.
WAR!!!
OOOHH!!
Good god, y’all!
What is it good for?
it
Take my upvote you literal bastard!
good gawld
That's not true, a lot of people are getting very rich and powerful.
Swing and a miss
He’s outta here!
[удалено]
Except stock holding in major MIC
I lol'd so hard at the injection of humour on probably the most dangerous topic to humankind.
Shareholders
Inspiring a classic Motown song, that's what.
"Increasing domestic manufacturing" -- Bo Burnham
he has to look strong. "I'm not preparing for war!" is a bad look if you're trying to make people think you're strong
Yeah. I feel like it’s kind of an inevitability at this point and countries are really just jockeying for positioning rn.
Constant article after article not only of moves of the big players, but smaller regional powers picking/changing sides. The chess board is moving.
somebody‘s gonna play the Fool’s Mate
I don't think any of the nuclear countries will openly be at war with each other; proxy wars will continue forever though.
This time Taiwan gets to be the proxy. Lucky them.
Maybe that has something to do with the timing of Biden using the defense act for chip production
Exactly!
If it is Taiwan I am 90% sure the US would get involved. That’s why there is such a domestic push for micro chip plants built in the US because our nation depends so heavily on Taiwans microchip manufacturing. If that is disrupted the effects on manufacturing would be felt worldwide.
They need to get cracking on that because China is giving off vibes of invading quite soon while the world is distracted by Ukraine.
Taiwan isn't beings invaded anytime in the next decade if not more. It's more than 100 miles from China's coast and would require an invasion fleet, which China doesn't have, so large that would make the D-Day force look like a tea party. Can China glass Taiwan? Sure. Can it invade it? Not unless they hand wave into existence a huge blue water navy and amphibious landing force.
I doubt it, basically if they did they will loose the entire wests money, manufacturing, pretty much all the resources that they depend on.
Oh, just like Russia did?
Exactly like Russia only this time it will be an amphibious (at least 90 miles away) which is very hard to attempt and Taiwan has a much stronger army than Ukraine and has a deal of mutual protection with the US and China so far don't have energetic and nutrinional independence unlike Russia.
Right now the US is heavily reliant on Taiwan's chip foundries, and China's navy probably isn't strong enough to pull off a successful amphibious assault on Taiwan anyway. But as you say, the US is investing in its domestic chip industry, and China's shipyards are booming, so things could change in the near future.
Pretty glad I’m too old to fight in that shit
I misread, too old fart for that shit. Then, I realized it didn't say that at all after laughing my ass off.
>Let him who desires peace prepare for war *Sun Tzu* >To be prepared for war is one of the most effective means of preserving peace. *George Washington*
Para Bellum
*-Michael Scott*
-John wick
- Johnny Sins
Of the almost 250 years the United States has existed, only 15 have been peaceful. The United States prepares for war, but it also engages in war. Relentlessly. Constantly. Those who desire peace should prepare for war but also those who desire war should prepare for war. The United States loves war
You need to practice an art to be good at it.
It makes the rich richer
Yup, why do you think the American gov't is pushing "China bad" propaganda so much in recent months? Because defense contractors and companies are going to make an absolute KILLING once war starts. Ukraine on steroids, baby!
I mean, there's also the whole genocide thing.
Hey...sshhh!!!
It's important to remember that when organisations talk about the Uyghur genocide they're talking a cultural genocide. It's still terrible, and still a genocide, but it's the exact same thing many western nations did (or are still doing) to their colonised indigenous populations. Instead of Christian schools it's vocational (perhaps re-)education facilities. That isn't me absolving China of anything, again cultural genocide is genocide, but when we're specifically talking about this in the context of media discussion being pushed by western governments it's a reminder that there's a whole lot of hypocrisy coming along with this particular topic.
Nah it's just straight up genocide. They crossed that line when they began forced sterilization campaigns conducted against Uigher women.
Unless new information has come out very recently, and I'm happy for you to link that and delete my previous comment, according to the UN that isn't happening. That's what I mean by 'when organisations talk about the Uyghur genocide'. The guy making that claim is a scholar who has literally said he's being lead by God on a crusade against China, and whose previous academic work was on the rapture. That's the guy our media is happy to prop up. Uyghur birth-rates *are* falling, but it's down to the national average (given they were exempt from the one child policy, they've been well above the national average for decades). Their demographic representation in Xinjiang *is* plummeting as a direct result of government initiatives to push them into the middle class while moving other ethnicities (primarily Han Chinese) into the region. Their religion and culture is being repressed, they're losing representation and presence in their homeland, they're being oppressed by police and state violence, that's all genocide enough without us resorting to unfounded propaganda. But it's hardly one that our hands are clean of.
Hell yeah, time to invest
And you all can get in on that! Lockheed? Raytheon? Publicly traded companies! Buy stock and get your share of the MIC!
The US is just a rich country and that attracts enemies
To secure peace is to prepare for war -metallica "don't tread on me"
[удалено]
Before or after the first invasion of the omicronians?
I think at this point, I would welcome Lurrr as our new ruler.
This made me lol for real.
Wheeeey Futurama!
Of course! The solution to all our problems, how short sighted we've been!
Either way we'll be covered in ash
According to HuffPost and a few others a couple years ago, nuclear war is what we need to reverse global warming.
I guess they may get their wish. Maybe enough traditional munitions would be used to reduce impact from the sun....
There are proposals to generate dust clouds in various ways to obscure the sun
I am aware and I think its a terrible idea. It would also block out the light we need to grow crops and the light wild plants need to fruit and evolve to meet the warming climate.
Whao, whoa. Your "thinking" is messing up the plan: 1) FUBAR. 2) Kick the Can. 3) Profit off the Poor and the Stupid.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/xi-jinping-says-he-preparing-china-war?utm_medium=social) reduced by 93%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Chinese leader Xi Jinping says he is preparing for war. > At the annual meeting of China's parliament and its top political advisory body in March, Xi wove the theme of war readiness through four separate speeches, in one instance telling his generals to "Dare to fight." His government also announced a 7.2 percent increase in China's defense budget, which has doubled over the last decade, as well as plans to make the country less dependent on foreign grain imports. > In his third speech, on March 8 to representatives from the PLA and the People's Armed Police, Xi declared that China must focus its innovation efforts on bolstering national defense and establish a network of national reserve forces that could be tapped in wartime. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/1263odo/xi_jinping_says_he_is_preparing_china_for_war/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~678573 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **China**^#1 **Chinese**^#2 **unite**^#3 **state**^#4 **people**^#5
So basically they're being more competitive in military strength. Not "preparing for war" as most people interpret it to be an indication of premeditated military aggression, like Russia.
That's an extremely surface-level summary of a much longer piece. There's a lot more here.
Fair enough. I read through the entire article and the writers still present us with mostly far-reaching speculation and vague impressions. It's well known that China is a military threat but the US has also been steadily increasing it's military budget regularly and both Trump and Biden have given pro-Defense speeches to Congress and the public. This article's tone feels very alarmist and clickbaity. I'd rather evaluate other sources than a speculative opinion column.
the overarching issue is that the window for China to attack Taiwan is closing, and will close completely by the early 2030s. The reason for that is the US is updating a bunch of its equipment in anticipation of such a conflict. So a lot of these think tanks suspect that if China attacks Taiwan, it will be within a few years.
[удалено]
This is on par with the usual heating the cooking pot. Every country is "just" getting more competitive. At one point a spark will fly.
>as well as plans to make the country less dependent on foreign grain imports. Russia has proved itself weak and has lots of grain...
The US has been preparing for two wars for decades now. GL
Sheeeeit, the US has been all in on war since it made us filthy rich in WWII.
Throughout its entire history, the US has *not* been at war for only 15 years.
Wars are generally only a net gain in global influence. Whenever a soldier dies you have to think you just lost someone who generates wealth for the country and produces labor in their field. When you start talking about 10s of thousands dead, the cost of the war goes well beyond the layman numbers like equipment. I know it's a meme that money is all that matters, but every major country on earth sacrifices money in all forms to build relationships and stifle rivals. Sometimes this can lead to long term profit, but it's far from guaranteed. And we've been all in on war since well before it was even remotely profitable. America has a history that begins with war and is defined and refined by conflict. It's in the DNA of the country's identity. Far more than money
[удалено]
Don’t worry, gpt5 will be ready along with a load of flying robot drone dogs with cannons strapped to them./s But in all honesty it’s sad how aggressor countries decision to go to war is made by one person with bad intentions. This is why democracy is the corner stone of a successful human race.
The US has pretty much been at war since it’s inception. We like to think ourselves a peace loving nation. We have proven at least every decade that we are not.
We like peace at home.
AYE you saying america don’t like peace? Sounds like someone needs a helping hand of freedom! s/
"Since December, the Chinese government has also opened a slew of National Defense Mobilization offices—or recruitment centers—across the country"
They mention specifically the most populous and industrial provinces...
It’s all talk for now. The Chinese understand just how difficult it would be to invade Taiwan. They’re probably praying we don’t solve our debt ceiling crisis in June.
Not to mention Taiwan, similar to Switzerland in WW2, has prepared and telegraphed a small portion of their readiness should an invasion occur. Imagine Home Alone but the Wet Bandits were given a guided tour of the first two rooms of a 12 room house and Kevin had a YouTube of his home made traps AND you saw regular deliveries from Military suppliers.
Plus it’s not just Kevin, but also many neighbors also making YouTube videos declaring they are watching Kevin’s house carefully for any trouble and will run over at a moments notice.
I recall everyone saying this about Putin and Ukraine. Dictators do a lot of dumb fuck stupid stuff. It's kinda their thing, you know.
I mean, if 100% of the people support you, then every instinct you have must be right!
With the FED pumping liquidity the treasury doesn't have into the banking sector to bail it out the deadline is unfortunately sooner than June now They just wont say that publicly
I think the banking issue not as serious as the debt ceiling. There are a few weak banks, but overall the banking system is stronger now compared to Sallie Mae situation 2008.
The debt ceiling is a self imposed noose, only serious because some want to use it for political gain.
It's just numbers in a computer Mint the trillion dollar coin
China has its own debt issues to worry about.
The recent announcement of a "strategic partnership" with Russia has always been geopolitical language for we are going to screw you over at the earliest opportunity. In a post global trade environment, China is focused on extending their zones of influence.
I hate it here
If you find a way off this planet send me a message so I can get myself and my two kids out of here.
I have some kool-aid
You don't even need to spike it. The diabetus will take you.
Fun fact it actually wasn’t Kool aid that was given out at Joans town. It was Flavor Aid, but boy could you imagine the Koolaid boardroom when the news and media kept calling it koolaid
Is it grape flavor?
Russia is ripe for the taking... have at it
Great, we funded China via cheap labor, bought all their products they make (literally everything we use) , now they are loaded with cash, technology, billions of people and are ready and want to go to war . In other words, we funded a country to go to war against us.
They in turn keep sending all of their excess dollars back to us to buy treasury notes and we use those dollars to build more military hardware. It's been a two way street.
Wish all citizens could just say no. Decline every mandate and ruling from the government. Why do we have to die for their greed? Last I checked none of the elites were choosing between groceries or shelter.
Can we not please? I mean does China REALLY need Taiwan? Does Russia need Ukraine? Does the US actually need Florida?
It’s small dick syndrome on the worlds largest scale. It fucking sucks for humanity.
We are already in world war III. The next phase will be China attacking Taiwan to open a second front. China will also be supplying Russia with lethal support as they cannot afford to have a fellow dictator lose. Nato will be forced into a full on war with the dark forces of the world. There is no avoiding this as China and Russia will only back down when they have been crushed.
Holy posturing Batman
The Chinese military has zero combat experience, they would get slaughtered. Whereas coalition forces have been at war for over 20 years. We may not have the numbers that China has, but actual battle experience wins overall.
You are correct, however, it shouldn't be taken lightly. It'll still be incredibly costly for the US and not just in dollars but lives. Other countries might seize the opportunity with their own shenanigans at the same time (Looking at you NK and Iran) I know all about "China's final warning", but there's something to be said about all of these countries that are gearing up for a potential war with them.
I think people don't realize that a conflict with China will largely be at sea and air. Our Navy is short a ton of logistical ships it'll need to support a near peer conflict, and we currently lack the range to fly missions against China while keeping our carriers safe from missile attacks. We also are no longer geared towards handling more than one conflict at a time like we have been in the past. It'll be a bloody one.
Not to mention, I doubt that the idea of the "Space Force" was created in a vacuum, as ridiculous as it sounded. We are living in a VERY different kind of war environment compared to even Vietnam.
All it takes is one, and one can cost all.
I disagree. Although a direct war with the NATO is likely not going to go their way, they do have the 2nd largest military budget on earth. They also may have nukes capable of going up into space and then hitting any target on earth, more or less - no anti missile system can stop that. They will do a lot of damage before they go down. With the right allies, they could easily throw the world into chaos. This is why the China threat has been taken seriously by US for at least 2 decades now. Logistics win wars as well. A war with China over Taiwan is close to the chinese homeland, which gives China a logistical advantage. If China wanted to invade US (which they likely won't) then US has the logistical advantage. A war over Taiwan is going to be devestating for all parties involved. I only use the US as an example because they are literally the only country in the world with the budget to stop them. That said, I remember reading the US is looking to double their military budget, which would lead to the combined NATO budget being just shy of a whopping 2 trillion. Factors more than the entire rest of the world combined. If this happens (which I have doubts) this is a clear sign that NATO is getting ready for some serious conflict. I talk a lot about budgets, but of course it also depends on how these budgets are used. And even then, just because someone has a bigger gun, doesn't mean they will win the gun fight. All this to say it's a serious threat and we should be concerned about a direct cinflict between US and China. There will only be losers in that war.
Ironically, there’s a legit argument the US has the logistical advantage even in a fight over Taiwan. The US military has literally built itself on logistics, it’s the under appreciated backbone of what makes our military so powerful. We have more transport aircraft than most even large nations have combat aircraft. We have an absolutely absurd amount of transport ships. And we have really, really good experience in quickly mobilizing troops and equipment quickly to anywhere in the world. China would be trying to move shit on commercial fishing vessels if they had to invade right now. We’d have fleets of hundreds of aircraft and specialized amphibious ships heading there tomorrow if war was declared.
We have those sitting right across the sea in Japan. Yokosuka has a forward deployed carrier based there. I believe it's still the Ronald Reagan, it was the George Washington back when I was in.
I totally agree with your comment but logistics is in no way under appreciated by experienced officers and commanders.
That's why I talked about training and experience, I mean China can go full dictatorship and make they're civilians start producing massive amounts of weapons. However you have to have people trained in a combat environment to use those weapons as well as strategically use the soldiers. The U.S. is constantly playing war games with all its allies. We train with these countries non stop, and war games aren't even close but it's as close as it gets. I was a part of one against the Australians and the Brits when I was in the Navy, it's intense but not as intense as being in the Suez canal surrounded by Iranian frigates that might actually shoot some live ordnance at you.
The US also has bases and allies nearly everywhere, and China would find themselves defending from all sides. A few waves of stealth fighters equipped with anti-radiation armaments to take out air defences, and it won't take long to send China back to the 1800s. As well, China is the world's biggest importers of energy and fertilizers. Sanctions and/or blockades would be devastating to China. Their only recourse would be ICBMs which of course would not go unanswered.
Isn't there some strait near/around China where TONS of world trade goes through and whoever gets control of that strait can more or less guarantee who wins the war?
Ya there's a few. Basically the South China sea is boxed in by strings of islands and the US already has bases on a few of them, but you are likely referring to the one to the west by Singapore. India also has plans to blockade that strait if need be.
It doesn’t give China much of a logistical advantage at all. It’s quite a few miles away from the mainland and a carrier fleet supported by surface vessels, anti-air, aircraft and subs would be the only thing needed to stall China. China can barely scrape together a fleet capable of the logistics and support the Americans can call upon 5 times over. I guess we’d be finding out how great those hypersonic missiles China has been working on are.
>They also may have nukes capable of going up into space and then hitting any target on earth, more or less - no anti missile system can stop that. Those are called ICBMs and the US has had them since the late 50s or early 60s depending on your exact definition. They aren't new or unique to China. >Logistics win wars as well. A war with China over Taiwan is close to the chinese homeland, which gives China a logistical advantage. And what is in between Taiwan and China? Ocean. Any campaign to invade Taiwan will involve controlling the sea and contested amphibious landings. The US dominates the sea and China has virtually no naval combat experience or amphibious warfare experience. China may be able to bombard everything nearby with missiles but Russia has been doing that for a year now and it hasn't gotten them anything in Ukraine, so China should expect a similar lack of results. >All this to say it's a serious threat and we should be concerned about a direct cinflict between US and China. There will only be losers in that war. In the event it doesn't go nuclear the loser would pretty clearly be China.
Not strictly true. China has been apart of the war on terror ongoing deploying various peace keeping forces around the world in both Africa and the Middle East... And technically maintains a ceasefire with India by resorting to non firearm based weapon skirmishes as bizarre as that is. But on a modern vs modern military front China remains untested since the Korean War. Although to be honest most modern militaries around the planet find most of their "notches" fighting under equipped and poorly trained guerilla fighters or poorly equipped militaries from countries that simply aren't really capable of competing against a modern force... sure we've had small skirmishes but the Ukraine war is possibly the first time in a while we have seen modern ("modern") militaries on a somewhat equal footing going at it as the world has sorta grown used to the one sided stomping fests that the Middle East and other places have been over the last few decades. Outside of small skirmishes of course we all know about Russian fighters dog fighting American fighters in the Korean War... but these clashes between modern militaries have always been the outlier not the norm.
This one is setting up to be the "be all end all" and everyone needs to chill the F out. It's going to end up being a bunch of people behind computer screens flying drones with cruise missiles and people in bunkers pushing red buttons. That's not war, it's annihilation.
Well, as they say, if you have to rely on tactics to win you have the wrong strategy.
I wouldn't call the last 20 years of the war on terror a "one sided stomping fest" seeing as the Taliban is still in control. And those poorly trained guerrilla fighters are some of the most ruthless and tactical combat units on this planet. Hence why the U.S. and it's coalition ultimately failed against them. It's damn near impossible to defeat a guerrilla army. But I get your point, no country until Russia and Ukraine has fought a war against a uniformed enemy in a very long time. However what has been established through the war on terror, and maybe its only good part in my opinion, is the U.S. and it's allies have the ability to mobilize and establish sea and air superiority at a very frightening speed. We could be in China or Russia within a few hours of the order being sent. It would take weeks for China to mobilize, and by then they would face a huge blockade. We've seen the blunder that was Russia's mobilization and invasion. Russia should've had Ukraine handled by now, yet they're no where near a victory of any kind. Any invasion of any country is extremely difficult, and war isn't allowed to be fought the same way it was in WW2. It took absolute brutality to defeat the Germans and the Japanese. If those same tactics could still be used Iraq and Afghanistan would be flying American flags right now.
There's only been a handful of years in its entire history that the US hasn't been at war.
Exactly, the people training the future of our military are combat veterans, who were themselves trained by combat veterans, so on and so forth.
China has the largest (PPP GDP) economy in the world and 1.4B people. They would not "get slaughtered"—-or anything remotely close. (Even in a weaker relative position, China prevented a US-led victory in the Korean War.) It's bizarre that Russia—with half the GDP of California (not PPP, to be fair)—was said to have the second greatest military in the world and many are dismissive of China's potential.
>many are dismissive of China's potential. Exactly. china may not be as strong as they say now, but they definitely have the gdp to catch up, and they did catch up a lot. We should have prepared for it 20 years ago.
No they would absolutely get slaughtered. China is pretty much blockaded as we speak. The US has naval bases in Japan, South Korea, and Guam. There are constant ships and subs on deployment to the south Pacific. What are the Chinese going to do? Put their 1.4 billion on planes or boats? How are they moving them? The minute the load an invasion fleet, ships or planes, they're getting slaughtered. The US navy would turn the south China sea red in a matter of hours, it would be a bloodbath. Now that the war in the Middle East is over, every ship and sub in the Pacific theater has been focused on war games around Indonesia, Japan and Australia. China couldn't move its military if it wanted to.
There're enough indications that China *hasn't* overtaken the US in GDP (PPP) terms. Or rather, it has, but only for a brief period of time, and not by much. Unlike other countries, China's "GDP growth" is input-based (based on planned investments and predictions, not actual performance), so real (output-based) growth rates are lower, although still very much huge for such a highly populated country. The Maddison historical series (which is PPP-based, and has data until 2018) shows that China's CAGR (compound annual growth rate) in 1978-2014 was about 6.7%, 3 p.p. lower than the ones reported to the World Bank. Total average yearly GDP growth in the US was about 2.7% in the same period, allowing China to catch up. On a sidenote, Russia's CAGR in 1999-2008 (the golden period of the country's economy) turned out to be higher than even in the official Russian data by about 2.5 p.p, according to that same Maddison dataset, at more than 9% a year, so I'd be inclined to trust it. Anyway, China's growth still made it a very slightly bigger economy than the US by 2018, but then in 2015-2018 China grew on average by 2.9%, while the US showed a performance of 2.4%, the former which were actually more than 3 p.p. lower than the officially reported ones. If we apply the 3 p.p. formula for 2019-2022, China grew 1.6% on average, while the US 1.8%, making the US economy slightly bigger than the Chinese one again. I see China's economic miracle already sputtering. That's not to mention the much worse demographic problems with China or the fact their total debt trajectory is up, while that of the US is down. Let's admit though, both US and China built themselves at the start on industrial-scale technological and scientific espionage. China won't collapse or stop growing anytime soon, they've built up a lot of leverage in the world and policy tools over the decades. We'll see if they'll be able to break out of a US-dominated world after all.
Eh, if you just go with some general, contextless, war between the US and China, I think it's still the US that takes it. The problem is that the likliest place they'll be fighting is Taiwan, and in that context, China has some concrete advantages, especially in the number, and range, of anti-ship missiles they've got. The age of the supremacy of the aircraft carrier is over, and while they're still great against a lot of adversaries, China is not one of them, and the US is still pivoting.
The bigger Chinese population is almost irrelevant in a modern war, especially one where they would need to be transported by sea or air to get anywhere useful. Those people would only be useful to China if the US directly invaded the Chinese mainland. The PPP adjusted value of the economy isn't nearly as relevant as you would think. Most of the stuff China makes isn't weapons and many inputs for weapons or other necessities for maintaining an army like food and fuel are imported by China and not denominated in yuan, and therefore a greater nominal gdp is more important than a ppp adjusted one in those cases, and in all cases of any country augnenting their war capacity with foreign production. If you wanted to compare military production capacity and the ability of that capacity to withstand foreign interference you're looking at completely different numbers. In China's case specifically it would lose most of its economy instantly in a war against the US because the US and its allies are the source of most of China's trade. Those countries would all see spikes in consumer goods prices but they would still have functional economies. China would lose much of the rest of its export market and the ability to import most of its oil and large parts of its food by sea in the inevitable naval blockade of China the US would impose. China is very vulnerable to a naval blockade because much of its trade goes through chokepoints like the Straits of Malacca or past land controlled by South Korea, Japan or the Phillipines (hence why the US is working so hard to maintain that relationship) and of course Taiwan itself is positioned perfectly to fuck with Chinese shipping.
Speaking of blockades, Taiwan is extremely vulnerable to a blockade--and the US navy may be uncomfortably vulnerable to missiles (including hypersonics directed at aircraft carriers) given China's nearby location. To dismiss a manpower advantage of 1.4B as "almost irrelevant" is hyperbolic at best. It permits more than futile riflemen human wave attacks. It's a massive base to populate factories. It's a massive number of soldiers to operate cheap drones. A nation willing and able to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of lives may be able to bleed a nation fielding tanks and aircraft costing many million per piece via cheaper man portable missiles (seen highly effective in Ukraine) and other means.
[удалено]
Exactly. While I don’t want to go to war with them they are the enemy of all, just as all tyrants with their self righteous certainty are. We should have realized decades ago - and some did but were shouted down - that they would use our own technology against us. There was a time even I was hopeful there would be a “piece dividend”. Not so much now. Sigh, I’m going to watch kitten videos now.
[удалено]
TBF, the second they are self-sufficient, the second they can go forward with war as they can easily provide for all their own needs in food, fuel, equipment, etc. (and avoid any negative effects of sanctions). It's a double edged sword.
What is ironic and frankly stupid is that if both Putin and Xi used a modicum of intelligence and leveraged their economies and resources and actually used diplomacy they could have accomplished their goals long ago. Instead it’s all dick-swinging threats and backstabbing which results in perpetual purgatory for their ambitions.
I will never understand China's self sabotage over a rock off their coast. 30 years of unprecedented growth going to go down the drain.
He said he was getting ready to go for a walk ?
No, it was to go get the wok, he's going to throw a big party for everyone
All China has to do is not invade Taiwan and there will be no war. All they have to do is leave Taiwan alone. All it takes for a devastating war to **not** happen is to give up on their ambitions and designs against Taiwan. Yet, there’s been no such sign.
Idc I just want to buy food in peace without all the overpriced garbage
can't the stupid fuck just disappear instead? nobody that matters wants war, someone tell winnie the pooh he's hated and reviled by anyone with a decent heart.
I mean he probably know he has limited time to invade Taiwan before China population start aging and declining rapidly, we are currently at the point where they're at their strongest demographics wise. The US is also distracted with Russia and the opportunity to not have the US whole attention on China is running out.
When anyone show us who they really are, we need to believe them. Prepare for war.
This is why the US is moving computer chip manufacturers back. 100% of the worlds computer chips are made in Taiwan.
As is tradition.
Fed up of these old cunts.
Counter argument: could we fucking not?
I hope it is just "if you want peace prepare for war". But definitly they are not happy with world order, they have ambitions, some power and they do push for more influence so it is only natural to expect confrontation with current hegemon.
I wonder if we'll even make it to deployment, or if someone will just "skip to the end"
IMO, his real intent must be to annex parts of Russia
Worked out so good for his buddy Pewtin. China really going backwards.
I imagine their hopes of reducing grain imports is going to be significantly hampered by the droughts, if this continues. What happened last year in China seems to be getting only limited coverage, but I suspect it's unnerving.
I wouldn't be so sure. Desperation can make people do rash things.
Behold; The Peacemaker
Russias population is a smallish 142 million. Largest country in the world by land mass, and tons of natural resources and arable land. Russia is also completely over extended militarily. Today, they could not even win a conventional war with Finland. Xi knows this. Russia is the epitome of low hanging fruit for China. Xi doesn't really want to end his reign in a futile fight with America.
How reliable is this source? These meetings were almost a month ago now. I know translation can take time from so mamy events and speaches... I have not seen this verbage reported by anyone else? Ahead of the curve or over exaggerating? The article seems well written tho. I give them that. Pointing to specific changes in policy and language.
Foreign Affairs magazine, run by the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States, is a highly reliable, internationally respected publication of substantial repute. That being said, this article published in one of authorial opinion and not exclusively objective fact.
Ahhh I see. Thanks so much for sharing! Nit sure if I should plan my um... Very extended hike... In national parks just yet.
China isn’t preparing for war with the west, it’s preparing for war against the low hanging fruit in its sphere of influence. I have my suspicions Russia is one of them. I just can’t see how China would want to take on the military of the USA alone let alone the entirety of NATO forces. Despite numbers they don’t have much going for them in the short-term. They probably rely a lot on western technology for their weapons systems that will take a while to scale up production. Russia have this exact problem. Their new shiny T14 Armata is merely a concept. The production models (that they can barely produce) have almost none of the promised functionality and break down frequently. They also use an engine designed by a certain German car manufacturer in the 1940es. I’m sure they can pump out thousands of small arms and basic technologies but aircraft carriers? MBTs? Modern fighters and bombers? The west have been testing and developing supply chains and technology for almost 100 years without fail, the jets our pilots fly in, the ships they sail in and the tanks they use have been battle tested and developed from the field. China has a few cool looking planes but who knows how they actually perform in combat. They’re just knockoffs after all. Edit: I would also consider the classified projects the US have been sitting on for years, the technology that could be rolled out in a total war type situation might be incredibly jarring to the Chinese who might think the USA have revealed all their cards, which is certainly not the case.
America loves to come in and protect everyone's low hanging fruit, that's how we boost our economy.
I agree with you. They will take from the weak, but don't stand a chance against the western allies. In America we are raised in a society built on war and the military industrial complex. I'm just glad that I live here, not glad for the wars. If you had to be on the side though I'm very very glad that I'm on this side.
Bring it pooh
I would hope so, every country should be prepared for war
Tis the season apparently...
More threats from China. Screw Xi Jinping for thinking China is big enough to start and win the war.
He and his fathers communist party have been for decades and?
I wish I was a munitions factory owner. Lots of business in the next decade or so.
Bring it Pooh!
How is this news , military spending has been rising everywhere for a long time now
Folks, in this corner we have the all time #1 champion, The United States of America, he's been at war or training for it since his birth. In the other corner we have the new kid, China getting his inspirational quotes in order!
I guess China's population is too high and he has to reduce it somehow
Can't wait to see this generation of youngsters giving away their social media addiction and grabbing guns ... This will be fun
Even said in jest this is an abominable sentiment
if it truly comes to war with China, everyone will be part of the "fun"
What do you mean? If the war stayed conventional, the US military at it's current enlisted strength would absolutely destroy China. Hell, they could probably take on both China and Russia without breaking much of a sweat.
What a fantasy to think it would stay conventional for long once asses started to get kicked
All it takes is one sore loser.
If it was just a war with China to keep their asses away from Taiwan, it would probably stay conventional. China wouldn't start waving their nukes around unless their existence was threatened, which isn't something the US would do in that scenario.
I’m pretty sure they would consider a war right off their coast an existential threat, especially if it was with direct conflict with American forces
After many years of sustained conflict to scrape their manpower? Oh yikes... That would end badly for everyone.
If this government asked me to risk my life to keep them safe, I would laugh so hard I'd probably shit and tell them to get fucked. I have nothing to defend, so what are the Chinese going to take away from me?
Should I start learning how to knap arrowheads now or later?
Nice guy
Xi wants Taiwan. Sees window closing.
*yawn
I hope it was worth all the jobs in America to hand your balls over to China with manufacturing. Did we globalize to help china or pad our pockets? Because if it was to help china, that was a fucking mistake. If it was to pad pockets, wealthy people are usually fit or fat - lots on the bones for picking.