It would be much better to maintain nuclear force away from the mainland. How about basing some nuclear subs near those SCS islands? But they have to reclaim more land from those islands first?
China need a new geopolitical Doctrine ?
- Thread starter MrCrazyBoyRavi
- Start date
- Status
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
That sentence doesn't mean anything. Everybody's very resilient. Somalia's very resilient LOL. US Q2 GDP contracted 37% while China's grew 3.2%. Now that's a sentence that has meaning when it comes to economic resilience.
Like I said, the biggest thing is the India ban. The US ban hasn't happened yet as they're trying to convince Tiktok to operate like a US company (?) and honestly no Chinese company should rely on the American market for anything anyway.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
The US does not have medium range missiles due to its agreement with Russia. It may be working on them, but does not have them nor the bases for them, at least not yet.
Chinese nukes don't use GPS. Beidou is many many satellites circling the earth and it's not possible to do a strike on all of China's satellites at once, much less with a single EMP.
They need to find the correct truck from all the decoys first and then launch a missile past all of China's SAM defenses before they can target a DF battery. It does not US GPS.
This might be a weakness but as the US works on its medium range missiles, China works with Russia on this, as Hendrick pointed out.
That goes for any country being fired on by a submarine, which China has as well.
Last edited:
Not sure whether to put it here or the Chinese economy thread. Since it mentioned 5 eyes etc. Here it goes.
Surprisingly relatively balanced view of the current 5G situation, and the poison chalice the Canadian is facing. What are the thoughts of our Canadian members here?
Here's the headline.
'After Huawei: Abandoned and coerced, Canada prepares for its humiliation
WESLEY WARK
SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL
PUBLISHED JULY 16, 2020'
However, it doesn't stop the writer taking a swipe to mention Hong Kong, Uyghur. etc. Lol
'But will Canadians care? Opinion of the Chinese state, after all, is plunging here, fuelled by concerns about China’s treatment of its Uyghur minority, its imposition of new security laws in Hong Kong, its aggressive global posture and, above all, the continuing detention of Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. Many Canadians might even see a decision against Huawei as the right call.'
But here's the real choice facing Canadians, it basically zero choice! It is not surprising outsiders see Canada as the 51st state.
'Canadians might not care about a Huawei ban, but we do need to consider the implications for the Canadian innovation economy. If Huawei leaves our shores, we will lose the benefits of its outlay, estimated at a GDP contribution in Ontario alone of half a billion dollars and support for some 3,800 jobs. Canadian research and development in 5G, where Huawei Canada was a global leader, will suffer. Canadian universities that have forged research partnerships with Huawei will struggle, with other sources of funding hard to come by. Rural and Northern Canada may suffer further delays on access to modern telecommunications infrastructure if Huawei has to pull out of Canada.
Another consequence of a coming Canadian ban on Huawei in 5G will be the further deterioration in Canada-China relations and possible retaliation against Canadian trade and travellers. A deeply held Chinese government perception of Canada as a supine follower of a hostile U.S. will only be confirmed. A more nuanced reality wouldn’t occur to Beijing.
The Huawei case is a stark demonstration of the limits of Canadian sovereignty and the lack of any strategy for economic security as the U.S.-China geopolitical battle heats up. Unfortunately, we cannot expect forced Canadian acquiescence in a U.S. policy on Huawei to generate any benefits in terms of real U.S. support for our needs, including in the case of the two Michaels. Yes, the Five Eyes network will survive, and that’s a big plus for Canada. But the U.S. bluff on the future of the Five Eyes was never called and was never going to be called by Canada alone. And this lost fight to secure Canada’s interests won’t be the last.'
Rest of the article:
Surprisingly relatively balanced view of the current 5G situation, and the poison chalice the Canadian is facing. What are the thoughts of our Canadian members here?
Here's the headline.
'After Huawei: Abandoned and coerced, Canada prepares for its humiliation
WESLEY WARK
SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL
PUBLISHED JULY 16, 2020'
However, it doesn't stop the writer taking a swipe to mention Hong Kong, Uyghur. etc. Lol
'But will Canadians care? Opinion of the Chinese state, after all, is plunging here, fuelled by concerns about China’s treatment of its Uyghur minority, its imposition of new security laws in Hong Kong, its aggressive global posture and, above all, the continuing detention of Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. Many Canadians might even see a decision against Huawei as the right call.'
But here's the real choice facing Canadians, it basically zero choice! It is not surprising outsiders see Canada as the 51st state.
'Canadians might not care about a Huawei ban, but we do need to consider the implications for the Canadian innovation economy. If Huawei leaves our shores, we will lose the benefits of its outlay, estimated at a GDP contribution in Ontario alone of half a billion dollars and support for some 3,800 jobs. Canadian research and development in 5G, where Huawei Canada was a global leader, will suffer. Canadian universities that have forged research partnerships with Huawei will struggle, with other sources of funding hard to come by. Rural and Northern Canada may suffer further delays on access to modern telecommunications infrastructure if Huawei has to pull out of Canada.
Another consequence of a coming Canadian ban on Huawei in 5G will be the further deterioration in Canada-China relations and possible retaliation against Canadian trade and travellers. A deeply held Chinese government perception of Canada as a supine follower of a hostile U.S. will only be confirmed. A more nuanced reality wouldn’t occur to Beijing.
The Huawei case is a stark demonstration of the limits of Canadian sovereignty and the lack of any strategy for economic security as the U.S.-China geopolitical battle heats up. Unfortunately, we cannot expect forced Canadian acquiescence in a U.S. policy on Huawei to generate any benefits in terms of real U.S. support for our needs, including in the case of the two Michaels. Yes, the Five Eyes network will survive, and that’s a big plus for Canada. But the U.S. bluff on the future of the Five Eyes was never called and was never going to be called by Canada alone. And this lost fight to secure Canada’s interests won’t be the last.'
Rest of the article:
So according to this article from the guardian, the decision has nothing to do with cyber security, it's geopolitical.
Well, the cat is out of the bag, so Trudeau had better release Meng then.
It is telling that one of the most anti-Huawei Tory MP happens to be Ian Duncan Smith. A failed Tory leader with a Japanese grandmother! Hmmm.
Pressure from Trump led to 5G ban, Britain tells Huawei
‘Geopolitical’ factors were behind the move, the company was told, with hints that the decision could be reversed in future
Sat 18 Jul 2020 15.34 EDT
Rest is the article
Well, the cat is out of the bag, so Trudeau had better release Meng then.
It is telling that one of the most anti-Huawei Tory MP happens to be Ian Duncan Smith. A failed Tory leader with a Japanese grandmother! Hmmm.
Pressure from Trump led to 5G ban, Britain tells Huawei
‘Geopolitical’ factors were behind the move, the company was told, with hints that the decision could be reversed in future
Sat 18 Jul 2020 15.34 EDT
Rest is the article
UK already flipped flopped three times, they may reverse it in the future just to reverse it again...
BTW I heard the real reason the US took out the Iran general in the beginning of this year had nothing to do with terrorism or national security, Saudi have been having a lot of backroom talk with Iran and he was to try to persuade them join the China/Russia/Iran in dumping the dollar and that was the real reason the drone strike was ordrered to kill him.... its all geopolitical at this point, so I'm not surprised the UK thing was also geopolitical...
And yeah, why is Meng still held hostage? Trump admitted in Rose garden the other day he personally called world leaders to coerce them to ditch Huawei and such things...
Lastly, Trump is setting himself up to steal the election in November, this could cause a civil war in the US. no joke.
I'm flip flopping showed they haven't got a foreign policy. It's basically dependent on the USA.
What does this say about dealing with the UK? It certainly shouldn't be trusted. The UK talk with folk tongue!
It is certainty possible Boris was playing Beijing and using Huawei as a bargaining chip to get concessions or promises of better trade deal with the US, after all they know how much Trump wants Huawei dead so an agreement to ban Huawei is very important to Trump and Boris probably gathered he could get a lot out of it, hence why also stating that they might reverse in the future, to hedge bets, in case the US doesn't live up to its end of the bargain! (its more of a way to tell Trump indirectly he better stick to his end of the deal etc)
Now that I think of it, Duterte's VFA flip flop was probably the exact same thing!
You're giving Boris way too much credit. He doesn't/couldn't think more than two weeks at a time. As they say in the UK, "a week is a long time in politics".
You're right in saying that the UK is taking a swipe at the USA to ensure they deliver what they promised with the "deal could be back on if things change" message. That should ensure USA complies and not going back on their words. Which is the least desirable outcome for the UK.
- Status