Thank you for info. But where i can find this datas? Give me a link, please.Actually a lot of people remember about the Soviet Union poorly. The Soviet Union back in 1985 had a higher GDP in PPP than the US.
Thank you for info. But where i can find this datas? Give me a link, please.Actually a lot of people remember about the Soviet Union poorly. The Soviet Union back in 1985 had a higher GDP in PPP than the US.
An actual example of such an 'attack' is actually China fully supporting Russia (well, economically), as well as efforts to dedollarize.Well, the difference is that USSR didn't hold most of the economical and technological cards vs the US, while China does.
The right amount of action, not overcommitting or undercommitting, can cause massive headaches to US without costing China too much.
China can both maintain its tech + economy lead and still attack US at the same time, as long as it does it in a non stupid way (not like EU attacking Russia for example).
Seems like Cuba can hit Miami with that. Can China use this to get some concessions out of US?
300 kilometers is only barely enough to reach the southern outskirts of Miami from the northern coastlines of Cuba. China would have to grant permissions for the export of MRLS with >300 kilometers of range in order to reach downtown Miami... Which risks opening up a pandora box of its own.Seems like Cuba can hit Miami with that. Can China use this to get some concessions out of US?
The Pandora’s box has been opened already300 kilometers is only barely enough to reach the southern outskirts of Miami from the northern coastlines of Cuba. China would have to grant permissions for the export of MRLS with >300 kilometers of range in order to reach downtown Miami... Which risks opening up a pandora box of its own.
I couldn't agree more, I've said the same thing here before. The Americans are dusting off the old Cold War playbook and are trying to create a new Cold War using the same tactics. China has, wisely, outmaneuvered the US by downplaying any talk of Cold War, has rejected looking at the world through ideological lenses and have embraced pragmatism. The folks who want China to devote resources to go against the west didn't see any part of the Cold War because they weren't born. If China wants to go head to head with the west it will lose, you can't win when you play the game they want you to play.The problem with Brezhnev was that he was a people-pleaser that did not want to rock the boat and make the nessasary reforms. By the 70s the Soviet command economy was suffering from low efficiency compared to free market + government guidance (ie Japanese economy), and in need of industrial upgrading. Instead of reforms and upgrading from a heavy-industry based economy to high-tech one, Brezhnev used engaged in all-spectrum proxy war with US across the world. USSR + Eastern bloc was already on the short end of economic stick against the collective West, and this massively sapped Soviet economic strength further and as a result USSR failed to become a high-tech economic power. USSR economy was only growing during early Brezhnev era because of the Oil Crisis of 70s, which covered up existing deficiencies and fooled Soviet leadership into continuing the status quo.
This is exactly the game US wants China to play. And this is why I despise comments that demand China to do everything it can to topple US, to interfere in affairs of other countries, or to create military alliances. All of these create massive geopolitical cesspools which will sap Chinese resources away from economic and technological development, which is exactly what US want.