Miscellaneous News

B

BlackWindMnt

Captain
Registered Member
t2contra said:
What is shocking to me is it was a recent talk, not 30 40 years ago.
Click to expand...
Recently i saw this study being posted on twitter:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


It calculated that the west could almost plunder 3 trillion dollar a year at its heights(around 2008) from the global south and smooth over incompetence governance.

In 2017, the most recent year of data, drain through unequal exchange amounted to $2.2 trillion; in other words, it was equivalent to the quantity of Northern commodities that one could buy in that year with $2.2 trillion. This represents a significant loss for the South. For perspective, $2.2 trillion is enough to end extreme poverty fifteen times over (i.e., with reference to the poverty gap at $1.90 per day in 2011 PPP, or the rough equivalent of Northern prices).
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
For the North, this represents $2.2 trillion in savings, which can be invested in technological development, military power, etc., while maintaining high consumption levels. Aggregate value transfer over the whole period sums to a total of $62 trillion.
Click to expand...
 
P

Petrolicious88

Senior Member
Registered Member
Bellum_Romanum said:
What makes you so sure? You speak with so much confidence that such scenarios would actually be successful against China’s military industrial sectors.
Click to expand...

What makes me so sure, lol. Because China doesn’t want to start WWIII. Because this war will mostly be fought in Asia, around the first island chain. Because with the exception of nukes and ballistic missiles, China lacks the ability to strike America mainland.

Successful or not is a different convo. But yea I can guarantee destruction of Chinese war industries is part of the Pentagon war games. Chinese industries can rebuild faster than America. There is no victory for America if China can replenish faster.
 
A

Arcgem

New Member
Registered Member
Not wanting to start WWIII does not equal not willing to retaliate on principle. The whole idea of MAD is that neither side wants to escalate, but will do so if one side crosses the line.

If China makes it clear that it will escalate like so upon being attacked, then the question becomes: does the US want to start WWIII by attacking Chinese industries?
 
P

Petrolicious88

Senior Member
Registered Member
Arcgem said:
Not wanting to start WWIII does not equal not willing to retaliate on principle. The whole idea of MAD is that neither side wants to escalate, but will do so if one side crosses the line.

If China makes it clear that it will escalate like so upon being attacked, then the question becomes: does the US want to start WWIII by attacking Chinese industries?
Click to expand...
Of course China will seek means to retaliate. Attacking bases in Japan, Australia, Korea, etc... is def possible, but would also widen the war to include other countries.

But retaliating against US factories and industries on US mainland?! Unlikely.
 
quantumlight

quantumlight

Junior Member
Registered Member
Petrolicious88 said:
Of course China will seek means to retaliate. Attacking bases in Japan, Australia, Korea, etc... is def possible, but would also widen the war to include other countries.

But retaliating against US factories and industries on US mainland?! Unlikely.
Click to expand...

If US attack China factories and industries first, it can say goodbye to Guam, Hawaii, Diego Garcia, and all its bases in Asia
 
A

Arcgem

New Member
Registered Member
Petrolicious88 said:
Of course China will seek means to retaliate. Attacking bases in Japan, Australia, Korea, etc... is def possible, but would also widen the war to include other countries.

But retaliating against US factories and industries on US mainland?! Unlikely.
Click to expand...

The fact that option exists is enough to present deterrence. I don't think the US is willing to risk going down that path by attacking Chinese land.
 
P

Petrolicious88

Senior Member
Registered Member
quantumlight said:
If US attack China factories and industries first, it can say goodbye to Guam, Hawaii, Diego Garcia, and all its bases in Asia
Click to expand...
Yes ok. Then US retaliates by further targeting Chinese industrial capacity to end China’s ability to supply those attacks against Us bases.

Even under that scenario, the damages will still be limited to the 2nd island chain. Most of the destruction will be around Asia.
 
Hendrik_2000

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Petrolicious88 said:
Yes ok. Then US retaliates by further targeting Chinese industrial capacity to end China’s ability to supply those attacks against Us bases.

Even under that scenario, the damages will still be limited to the 2nd island chain. Most of the destruction will be around Asia.
Click to expand...
Thing will escalate quickly So I don't believe you can confine war to Asia only. for the first time in history CONUS is not safe anymore or Australia No more sanctuary like in WW II. Here the west is at disadvantage with urbanization rate of 90% The bulk of population are concentrated in few large cities. Thing about it! before spewing jingoism. China urbanization rate is only 60% and They built thousand upon thousand kilometer of underground great wall
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top