manqiangrexue
Brigadier
If there was an all-knowing God, that's how he should be treated. Problem is, we have never seen evidence that he exists. However, there is, undisputedly, a CCP, and they know more classified information than we do and they have a track record of success.
2% because that's NATO's thing? Didn't know you liked to follow the West... What else should China follow the West in? Democracy? LOL China has our own system and we grow faster than they do.
Besides, did you want it to be a public 2% or they can do it unannounced like you said before? If they don't announce it, how do you know if it has or hasn't been done?
Do you know the needs set forth? Did they need more J-20s to defend China and its interests? Did they want to wait until WS-15 or other technologies are ready? Do they have a plan to make do with what they have now? You kinda need to be in the room during this conversation to have a good chance of understanding how to budget.
Do they have projects to be put on? Institutions that hire in order to hire are fraught with inefficiency and national security is one where that can be a dangerous game. From what I know, the Chinese military has its projects and it hires all the people it needs; it does not lack people nor does it hire them without real use.
And your post reads like a foolishly arrogant person demanding that his will be recognized over the analyses of experts that have classified knowledge that he doesn't and who have a resounding track record of success which he doesn't. Usually, when one finds himself in this situation, it is due to his simple mind misrecognizing itself as a genius.
They're not mutually exclusive but you are by no means equipped with the knowledge to make that determination.
Would CAC like that to change? Once again, is an expansion not happening because they need it but cannot afford it or because it's not needed now given the situation at CAC/the plans of the PLAAF? Do you know better or does CAC/CCP know better?
It's recalibrated with every new meeting, political change and every new technological advancement. Recalibrating it doesn't mean it's going to be what you want.
China's advancements and accelerated developments should have cued you that there is no complacency but regarding the defense spending level, go back to the first sentence of this post.
In the last post, you said you would not presume to be their teacher and now you presume you do. So this paragraph will need to reappear:
"And your post reads like foolishly arrogant person demanding that his will be recognized over the analyses of experts that have classified knowledge that he doesn't and who have a resounding track record of success which he doesn't. Usually, when one finds himself in this situation, it is due to his simple mind misrecognizing itself as a genius."
Last edited:
