China's Defense/Military Breaking News Thread
- Thread starter swimmerXC
- Start date
- Status
Understood. That means American defense spending is 22% that of the industrial production of the US, while China is at 3%.
Therefore, we can conclude that China's industrial capacity is much, much larger than the US.
But more importantly, this also translates to China having a much bigger leeway (and easier time + effort) to spike her defense spending and scale up her defense procurement in times of crisis and war, relative to the US. Is the understanding correct?
Last edited:
I'm just wondering how he sourced this number.
In4ser
Junior Member
That’s what I got too but America is supposed to #2 in world so it seems so pathetic for my country. Then again these are pre-COVID numbers so who knows?
Edit: I thought I deleted that tweet lol. I realized after posting, I was still logged into on alt account that had a name was similar to Jackson Hinkle’s channel (must have subconsciously borrowed the name when creating handle). Didn’t want to get confused or seen as a copy cat
Attachments
-
329D4C99-19D9-449C-815F-4B66D1F39266.jpeg
Last edited:
Last edited:
Remember these?
Here comes a timely reminder from the US:
The US and NATO are already expecting that any future confrontation with China and Russia will include the Arctic frontier. Therefore, it is imperative for China and Russia to bind together in order to keep the Arctic Ocean from becoming NATO's northern lake as much as possible.
The major reasons include:
1. Untapped abundant oil and natural gas resources buried underneath the Arctic. The exploration of the natural resources in the Arctic requires protection against any attempts by NATO+ from harrassing, bullying and snatching territories vital for natural resource extraction;
2. New shipping routes between East Asia, Russia and Europe as global warming reduces iceberg density in the Arctic. These shipping routes, especially the ones between China and Russia, have to be protected from any attempt of harrassment by the NATO+ military forces;
3. The GIUP gap and the Aleutian Islands, which form the gateways into the Arctic. In order to break the stranglehold of these gateways and grant unlimited access by China and other countries into the Arctic, it is imperative that NATO+ military presence along these two gateways (or at least the Aleutian Islands) be curtailed;
4. Russian and Chinese strategic bombers will fly over the Arctic to reach CONUS. These bombers must be protected by Russian and Chinese military assets stationed in the Arctic to thwart any possible interception attempts by NATO+ fighters and warships in the region;
5. Russian and Chinese ICBMs will fly over the Arctic to reach CONUS. In order to increase the chances of these ICBMs making their way over to CONUS, NATO+ military forces in the Arctic, Alaska and Canada that are capable of intercepting these ICBMs must be suppressed beforehand; and
6. Russian and Chinese SSBNs can lurk in the Arctic and wait for orders to launch SLBMs towards CONUS. It is imperative that NATO+ warships and ASW units be flushed out of the Arctic in order to guatantee the safety of those SSBNs, thus better enforcing MAD policy.
All of the above reasons will be threatened if China and Russia does not maintain a solid military presence in the Arctic in the coming years and decades.
Here comes a timely reminder from the US:
The US and NATO are already expecting that any future confrontation with China and Russia will include the Arctic frontier. Therefore, it is imperative for China and Russia to bind together in order to keep the Arctic Ocean from becoming NATO's northern lake as much as possible.
The major reasons include:
1. Untapped abundant oil and natural gas resources buried underneath the Arctic. The exploration of the natural resources in the Arctic requires protection against any attempts by NATO+ from harrassing, bullying and snatching territories vital for natural resource extraction;
2. New shipping routes between East Asia, Russia and Europe as global warming reduces iceberg density in the Arctic. These shipping routes, especially the ones between China and Russia, have to be protected from any attempt of harrassment by the NATO+ military forces;
3. The GIUP gap and the Aleutian Islands, which form the gateways into the Arctic. In order to break the stranglehold of these gateways and grant unlimited access by China and other countries into the Arctic, it is imperative that NATO+ military presence along these two gateways (or at least the Aleutian Islands) be curtailed;
4. Russian and Chinese strategic bombers will fly over the Arctic to reach CONUS. These bombers must be protected by Russian and Chinese military assets stationed in the Arctic to thwart any possible interception attempts by NATO+ fighters and warships in the region;
5. Russian and Chinese ICBMs will fly over the Arctic to reach CONUS. In order to increase the chances of these ICBMs making their way over to CONUS, NATO+ military forces in the Arctic, Alaska and Canada that are capable of intercepting these ICBMs must be suppressed beforehand; and
6. Russian and Chinese SSBNs can lurk in the Arctic and wait for orders to launch SLBMs towards CONUS. It is imperative that NATO+ warships and ASW units be flushed out of the Arctic in order to guatantee the safety of those SSBNs, thus better enforcing MAD policy.
All of the above reasons will be threatened if China and Russia does not maintain a solid military presence in the Arctic in the coming years and decades.
Well well well,
A month ago this popped up on the Indian side, taser Batons.
In response, the Chinese side is now acquiring 2600 electrically insulating lang ya bangs. I think next clash might actually turn deadly.
A month ago this popped up on the Indian side, taser Batons.
In response, the Chinese side is now acquiring 2600 electrically insulating lang ya bangs. I think next clash might actually turn deadly.
If you are using bladed arms just start using guns.
I think we missed the nuclear armageddon part somewhere....
So long as no nuclear nation is invading each other it shouldn't be an issue, border skirmishes shouldn't instigate nukes. This medieval combat is pretty interesting, we some how went back in time, all the fantasy fair folk will be rushing to China and India now to enact their deepest fantasy. But this who has the pointier stick thing is pretty ridiculous when its getting to this stage, just shoot if you got to shoot. It's completely in the realm of something India wants and is delving into, China's response to India's plays so far has been top notch.
- Status