Miscellaneous News

coolgod

Colonel
Registered Member
They don't want war. They know if trump becomes president there will be war between them. And if there is war between Iran and us/Israel it's very clear those Arab idiots will side with America. In this case I don't think even China and Russia will help them. Which means Iran winning this war is nearly zero unless some miracles happen. You need to understand they don't have powerful military like china or Russia.
以斗争求团结则团结存,以退让求团结则团结亡

If Iran can't produce their own Mao Zedong, they should probably study him. Iran begging for new negotiations is pathetic and just invites more western aggression.
 

BlackWindMnt

Captain
Registered Member
以斗争求团结则团结存,以退让求团结则团结亡

If Iran can't produce their own Mao Zedong, they should probably study him. Iran begging for new negotiations is pathetic and just invites more western aggression.
I think we will know more later this year, gotta observe how that Iran-Russian security pact will develop.
That is if Iran will even sign it this month.
 

GOODTREE

New Member
Registered Member
In my view it's probably fine to let them have it in exchange for dropping threats to Taiwan and maybe letting Russia have all of Ukraine/the coast.

Dealing with the Taiwan reintegration will take a lot of attention from China, and same with US if they get Greenland. It could be a chance for both sides to cool off rather than go into a hot war. China doesn't mind US having an influence sphere in the Atlantic as long as our influence sphere in Asia is unrestrained. De facto speaking, Asia territory is worth a lot more than Atlantic territory.

The most dangerous/competent thing Trump can do is to focus on fixing corruption during a thaw period and then come back with a stronger US. Having them distracted with cartels and Greenland so they don't do that is maybe good.
Others' idea and mine: With regard to Trump's series of tough statements on neighboring countries, I think there are two aspects to it, on the one hand, one of the big goals of this Trump administration is to extract as much value as possible from their allies and to get as much as we can out of them. These statements were likely made as a preparation for a series of future lines. On the other hand, based on Trump's appointments to this administration, he has a strong will for internal reform. And often to push a reform smoothly, you're going to need a victory, you're going to need a victory to get a hold on the internal political discourse for yourself. Trump may well be really trying to achieve something to enable him to get an external victory, even if it's a victory over an ally.
So if Trump does achieve some degree of “territorial control” by some means (assuming he gets Greenland or the Panama Canal), it is more likely to pave the way for his internal reforms.
 
Last edited:

Randomuser

Senior Member
Registered Member
I was rewatching episode 11 from the anime Legend of Galactic Heroes. Its amazing how you always find new stuff with rewatches.

So basically one of the Emperor's concubine wants to murder the sister of the main character because she feels the MC's sister who's younger stole the emperor's heart. One of the villains who pretends to help her but is actually trying to get rid of her says "she is a fool who is still chasing the sun when it had already set long ago". Even if she killed the MC's sister, the emperor would not come back to her since she is old and past her prime and the emperor will just find someone else.

That quote was really damn good thinking about it. Loads of people do not want to accept things have moved on (like relationship split, no longer in power etc) but are still hoping for the good old days to come back. I realize you see this a lot with the west and their vassal states. For example, Europe which was once the center of envy when it had empires in the 1800s are now filled with people trying to hope those days will somehow magically come back when we can see that time has moved on while they haven't. That why all these so called progressive westerners you can see are always looking back to the good old days.

Well not just the west. You can see it with Russia. They still wish the days of the USSR would come back which is why they still have so much pride despite the fact that its is gone now. China was also the same with some of the worst displays being late Qing. We had morons who wanted the Qing dynasty to come back in the 1920s (after WW1!!!) not realizing China had moved on from those outdated guys over a decade ago.

When you realize how many people fall into this mindset, its easier to realize why entire countries act certain ways.
 

MonkeyEatingEagle

New Member
Registered Member
In my view it's probably fine to let them have it in exchange for dropping threats to Taiwan and maybe letting Russia have all of Ukraine/the coast.

Dealing with the Taiwan reintegration will take a lot of attention from China, and same with US if they get Greenland. It could be a chance for both sides to cool off rather than go into a hot war. China doesn't mind US having an influence sphere in the Atlantic as long as our influence sphere in Asia is unrestrained. De facto speaking, Asia territory is worth a lot more than Atlantic territory.

The most dangerous/competent thing Trump can do is to focus on fixing corruption during a thaw period and then come back with a stronger US. Having them distracted with cartels and Greenland so they don't do that is maybe good.
The system and the mindset/culture that goes with it in what makes USA right now is too entrenched that the only likely competent thing Trump or any US president can do is to ensure the dominance and victory conditions of their respective parties every election. Project 2025 is a great example.

Of course, there might be some exceptions depending on the events and situation that may occur making things dicey. With the exception of probably the lunar landing, war unites the US, their parties and their people like no other. But this isn't the 2000s and Iraq is not China.
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
It's interesting because around the time when China was importing J-11 there were voices in PLAAF saying Flanker is so much better than the then in development J-10 and the project should be dropped and the funds made available to buy more J-11. It went all the way to the top to Jiang Zemin who was very supportive of J-10 program because he understood the need to nurture domestic aircraft R&D to pave the way for future aircraft. He apparently smashed a teacup in front of PLAAF people and yelled at them telling them he doesn't want to hear from them again asking to cancel J-10.

While certainly the correct decision in retrospect as the experience gained by CAC eventually lead to the J-20 and J-36 today, Elder was taking on risk by supporting J-10, not only placing trust in CAC's ability to deliver but also it meant China had to take geopolitical threats on the chin in the meanwhile to not spark off any wars while they PLA was in a relatively weak state. Hence Yinhe incident, bombing of Belgrade embassy in 1999 and Hainan EP-3 incident in 2001.

Now that something similar is playing out in India I'm wondering if the decision to stick with Tejas is correct and could J-10 ended up going the same way if CAC was like HAL.

Jiang inherited a weak hand but placed it well. But the J10 call wasn’t as big as you are implying. Even if China bought a thousand more Flankers from Russia, it wouldn’t have changed things as far as your examples went.

The Tejas decision is irrelevant to be frank. The problem isn’t with this one project but the whole Indian establishment and industrial structure.

SAC was HAL, growing fat and complacent and kept looking for foreigners to give them the next big thing instead of seeking to advance and innovate themselves. And that was with CAC and the J10 giving them direct competition since they say the J11 as the high end with the J10 as the low end, and assumed a similar standing between SAC and CAC. It wasn’t until Chengdu won the next gen fighter contest with the J20 that SAC really fundamentally changed their ways. And that was with a big talent injection direct from CAC to SAC.

India with HAL as the monopoly supplier has no chance as HAL is too big to fail and will just never change their ways and keep failing upwards to secure more and more contracts and funding.

If the Indian government split HAL down the middle and had half work the the Tejas with the rest continue with flankers, they might at least have a chance.
 
Top