Miscellaneous News

Randomuser

Randomuser

Captain
Registered Member
ansy1968 said:
@tamsen_ikard bro a Chinese proverb for the day courtesy of Sun Tzu

"appear weak when you are strong and strong when you are weak"

I know you're not Chinese but I hope this proverb will help you understand how to become one, my good friend @Sardaukar20 who is a Malaysian fully conceptualized this idea, its not about race or color of the skin, its the values and philosophy behind it.
Click to expand...
There are too many video games and movies that are based on stuff like Starcraft and Command and Conquer. Where the only battlefield is physical force. So people are only familiar with that.

While physical force is the mother of all authorities, where does that force come from? Resources, technology, strategy etc. And so we go from tactical battles to multifaceted grand strategy games like Civilization or HOI where you achieve paths to victory through many methods.

Even illiterate Mongols knew that they needed a constant supply chain of soldiers, horses, weapons etc. They also had to know where to position their forces, who to coordinate with, what time to attack etc. Its not something simple as attack that guy over there until we win.

Its not wrong for Iran to take this ceasefire. Its wrong for them to waste the opportunity to finally sort stuff out while they can. And I am not confident they have learnt anything.
 
Last edited:
FriedRiceNSpice

FriedRiceNSpice

Captain
fishrubber99 said:
China is able to produce 12x the steel and 10x the number of cars compared to what the US can produce annually, this is a better indicator of the difference in industrial capacity. China also has 10x the manufacturing workforce.
Click to expand...
AndrewS said:
Remember that value-add numbers use the exchange rate controlled by the Chinese government, which undervalues Chinese output.

For example, take the same Tesla Model 3.
The Chinese price is about half the US price. But it's the same car.

So you have to adjust for Chinese prices with an Industrial or Purchasing Power Parity Index.
On that basis, Chinese industrial production would be adjusted with a doubling, to truly reflect actual output.

That gives China a 4x advantage in industrial production.
Click to expand...
PPP adjustment would increase Chinese manufacturing value add by 50%, to 3x. Coincidentally, automobile production is considered be a very good proxy for manufacturing output in modern economies - and China also produces 3x the number of automobiles as the US.
 
D

delfer

New Member
Registered Member
FriedRiceNSpice said:
I wasn't referring to GDP. Going by GDP, China would only have a 1.3-1.4x advantage.
Click to expand...
But you mentioned GDP in the very first part of your post? Slightly confused about that.

FriedRiceNSpice said:
I was citing manufacturing value add, for which China makes up around 32% of global output - while US makes up 15% and the G7 combined just under 30%.
Click to expand...
Indeed, manufacturing value. But that's where the example of multiple Chinese steel foundries potentially bringing in less revenue than a small Rolls-Royce factory comes into play. Manufacturing value doesn't necessarily mean the US has even close to that percentage of factories relative to China or the rest of the world, it just means that the financial value of their factories' production is at that level. But the US, like Rolls-Royce, or Louis Vuitton, inflates prices, has consumers willing to pay much more for their products, and deals with much smaller products and less materials. These types of factories do not tip the scales that much in terms of raw military power and capacity.

FriedRiceNSpice said:
While no doubt steel is important in war, steel is unlikely to be the bottleneck for military production. WW2 era militaries were much more steel intensive than modern militaries, yet like you mentioned, nations in WW2 produced far less steel than China does today.
Click to expand...
Steel was always important for war. And of course, even though the US will still be able to produce enough for itself, China will still be able to pump out 10x more, which is always an advantage. Anything you have more than your opponent is often an advantage. Not always, but usually.

FriedRiceNSpice said:
With regards to land size, that is yet another disadvantage Japan had in WW2 that the US would not have today, as China and the US are roughly equal in land size.
Click to expand...
Yes, China and the US are roughly equally matched in terms of square mileage, but if Japan with it's meager land size was such a difficult adversary for the US, an opponent of similar land size and resources would only further hurt the US' ability to counter any move or attack, putting it at an even greater disadvantage.
 
A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
FriedRiceNSpice said:
PPP adjustment would increase Chinese manufacturing value add by 50%, to 3x. Coincidentally, automobile production is considered be a very good proxy for manufacturing output in modern economies - and China also produces 3x the number of automobiles as the US.
Click to expand...

The "official" PPP adjustment would be 1.7x in favour of China

But remember there are a number of issues with the official PPP and GDP figures
My guess is that the adjustment would be around 2x
 
P

PLAwatcher12

Junior Member
Registered Member
iewgnem said:
Who said China just want to make US ineffective in the 1IC?
Once US declares war on China, what China wants isn't up to US to decide.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say that but, what you said I’m pointing out is extremely unlikely to happen.
tamsen_ikard said:
I feel like China has an Iran disease. They keep wanting to compromise, they keep want to just be at peace when your enemy wants to utterly murder you. What US has been doing to China with the export controls is literally economic murder and China hasn't done anything proportional. This peace disease will surprise China again and again in this fight against US empire.
Click to expand...
The US wants China to go to war as soon as possible it’s in Chinas best interest to wait as long as they can so they are stronger also China shut off rare earth minerals, those are very important
henrik said:
All Chinese islands in the South China sea should be converted into military bases, where all kinds of military assets should be placed. From there, there are more options for attacking the adversaries.
Click to expand...
most of the islands China has in the South China Sea are relatively small and not big enough to house military assets, plus they would be destroyed extremely quickly
 
FriedRiceNSpice

FriedRiceNSpice

Captain
gelgoog said:
Japan in WW2 wasn't just the home islands. They had huge industrial infrastruture in Korea and Manchukuo. The US always diminishes the Soviet contribution to WW2.
Click to expand...
Soviets contributed probably 70% of the war effort against Germany. Against Japan? Not very much. Kwangtung army in 1945 was third string for IJA. Their best troops had died in Burma and Southern China by that point, and their second best in the islands of the Pacific. NRAs best division were on their way back from victory in Burma and NRA had air superiority at that point. Despite all the KMTs shortcomings, the NRA was by far the army that did the most damage to IJA during WW2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top