supercat
Colonel
These are what you need to know, besides the fact that the author of the article, Lingling Wei, is notoriously unreliable.
Espionage involving China
- Thread starter kroko
- Start date
I find it hilarious that the same people scoffing at the Indo/FLG theory of Xi getting couped back in 2022 are suddenly finding equally absurd story of Zhang Youxia selling nuclear secrets credible.
Air University gets its information from OSINT. Some of it is right, some of it is wrong, much like rumors and speculations on this forum.
The specifics indicated on that reports has to come from insiders down to exact chinese name and exact GPS locations.
There is no way to get those from China public info.
There is alot of talk about the implementation of golden dome in US.
And this coincides with this PLA general leak story. Maybe more than coincidence.
US could be updating its system with those leak info.
Last edited:
That can’t possibly be true since all the nuclear missile silos have been destroyed by giant skeletons during the 2022 coup.
You may not believe the story of leaking but the observable effect is unbelievable. XI has purged all his most senior military staffs past few year.
As of today, there is no one left in the most senior military staff except Xi himself and one disciplinary or internal investigator .
This is a crisis in PLA.
This is a Fact.
You are just jumping to conclusions at this point. If we use “observable effects” as fact then we can conclude that Xi poisoned Li Keqiang so he won’t have competition. Where do we draw the line?
Use some common sense here. If the data revealed by AF University is of such high importance, enough to indicate that there is high profile leaker within the PLA, why would they post that on a publicly accessible website and incriminate their source?
Xi poisoned Li , we dont know. We only observe Li died.
The report didn't quote any leaker's name.
After the report came out, we observed Xi started to purge PLA senior staff a few years back.
The recent purge of top military officials from China's Central Military Commission serves as a political Rorschach test, revealing more about observers' biases than about Chinese governance itself. Anti-China hawks and Xi skeptics predictably frame these removals as evidence of systemic incompetence and dictatorial paranoia, particularly given the relentless nature of Xi's anti-corruption drive.
Yet this interpretation overlooks a crucial inconsistency: if "saving face" truly governed Xi's decision-making—as Western analysts often claim about Chinese culture—why would he publicly humiliate and prosecute officials with whom he has longstanding personal connections? The very public nature of these harsh charges suggests either that the corruption allegations have substance or that Xi's political calculus operates on principles more complex than simple face-saving concerns.