Miscellaneous News

E

Eventine

Junior Member
Registered Member
Boltzmann said:
This is a Russian narrative. It guides people to view Russian strength or weakness as a decisive factor in determining the struggle between the US and China. You can tell by how helpless it portrays China - claiming India(!) is going to stab it in the back and somehow bite off territory. Furthermore it talks up American military power. Yes, the value of weapons physically going to Ukraine is just a tiny fraction of American military spending, but what pro and anti Russian camps alike don't understand is that these aren't the only resources the US is committing to the project. People might not remember, but the US committed in the opening months of the war to build two massive, wholly new army bases in Poland and Romania, in addition to comprehensively 'rearming' its existing NATO allies with state of the art equipment like the f-35B. This is going to cost easily 100+B over the next decade. Every dollar spent on new European basing or on Polish f35's is a dollar that can't be spent on hardening US Pacific basing or building more planes to station out of first strike range in Hawaii. This, not the weapons to Ukraine, will absolutely be a drag on American readiness with respect to China.

What I'm trying to say is that the narrative you put out there is basically a Russian psyop meant to convince the Chinese that they should throw in with Russia and arm it because they stands no chance 'alone'. It projects Russia's own failings onto Chinese military preparations, much like western commentators. In reality China firmly holds the upper hand within the SIC and American attempts to expand its alliances with countries like the Philippines are basically a PR move.

China is not Russia, not even close, nor is it reliant on it for a chance against the US. We shouldn't uncritically accept any narrative that comes our way just because it uses pro China language.
Click to expand...
I have no interest in promoting Russian Chinese alliance or whatever it is that you think the purpose of this was. My argument is that the US is willing to go to war with China because it can get its vassals in the region to do the bleeding. All it needs to do is provide equipment & money, which sure, it's expensive, but it's nothing the US can't afford with its $900 billion military budget.

Ukraine is a great example of how the US operates. The country itself is bankrupt, decimated, much of its population fled or drafted, with little economy & industry beyond what aid money is able to sustain. If not for NATO, it'd have surrendered a long time ago because what would be the benefit of fighting on? But it's not surrendering, it's continuing to bleed, because NATO commands it to do so and whispers of victory and glory.

The same "deal" will be given to Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, India, etc. as long as they take up the fight against China. And what I'm saying is that half of that list are dumb enough to take it, because their societies have been so infiltrated by Western media and influence that they think it's their duty to take up arms. This is the danger that China faces - not that it'll face the US, but that it'll face all of its vassals first, long before the US shows up as the "final boss".

In no scenario where China exhausts itself fighting some combination of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines, is it a victory, because even if you win, you lose - your cities bombed, your infrastructure destroyed, your military weakened. All the while the US can sweep in after the fact to prevent China from gaining any rewards (ie occupation / surrender of the above countries) from the victory.

In such situations the only way to win is to not fight, because it costs the US very little to run these proxy wars, when compared to the horrors of war that will be visited upon China and the US's proxies.
 
Fedupwithlies

Fedupwithlies

Junior Member
Registered Member
bettydice said:
No one is going to believe such bluffing of China. China would not dare to do a nuclear retaliation strike against the US because China will be nuked back by the US. Besides, Taiwan is right in front of China while the US is far away from China's nuclear arsenal. Taiwan can strike China far quicker than China's retaliation strike reaches the US.
Click to expand...
You're saying that China won't nuke the US after the US nukes China because then the US would nuke China? What sort of logic is that?
 
E

emblem21

Major
Registered Member
Strangelove said:
Funny that you mentioned this, as I'm rewatching The Purge, one of my favorite series of films and because life imitates art, showing us the trajectory of American "greatness"... The experiment of freedom and democracy has high chances of failure, but things get really interesting (and entertaining for us folks on the opposite side of the Pacific) when this precarious social experiment is mixed with plenty of guns, massive racial tension and inequality, a collapsing economy and fentanyl....


View attachment 113715
Click to expand...
The funny part is that the USA might actually be dumb enough to try this, given with all the tent cities and with all those stores closing down fast, something is bound to go horribly wrong sooner or late
 
D

Deleted member 24525

Guest
Eventine said:
I have no interest in promoting Russian Chinese alliance or whatever it is that you think the purpose of this was. My argument is that the US is willing to go to war with China because it can get its vassals in the region to do the bleeding. All it needs to do is provide equipment & money, which sure, it's expensive, but it's nothing the US can't afford with its $900 billion military budget.

Ukraine is a great example of how the US operates. The country itself is bankrupt, decimated, much of its population fled or drafted, with little economy & industry beyond what aid money is able to sustain. If not for NATO, it'd have surrendered a long time ago because what would be the benefit of fighting on? But it's not surrendering, it's continuing to bleed, because NATO commands it to do so and whispers of victory and glory.

The same "deal" will be given to Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, India, etc. as long as they take up the fight against China. And what I'm saying is that half of that list are dumb enough to take it, because their societies have been so infiltrated by Western media and influence that they think it's their duty to take up arms. This is the danger that China faces - not that it'll face the US, but that it'll face all of its vassals first, long before the US shows up as the "final boss".

In no scenario where China exhausts itself fighting some combination of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the Philippines, is it a victory, because even if you win, you lose - your cities bombed, your infrastructure destroyed, your military weakened. All the while the US can sweep in after the fact to prevent China from gaining any rewards (ie occupation / surrender of the above countries) from the victory.

In such situations the only way to win is to not fight, because it costs the US very little to run these proxy wars, when compared to the horrors of war that will be visited upon China and the US's proxies.
Click to expand...
You're doing it again. I understand you don't mean to promote a Sino Russian alliance or spread Russian narratives but that is nevertheless what you are doing

China is not Russia. Repeat that to yourself until you believe it. Their capabilities are on different planets. One only has to look at gdp figures to deduce this. China could engage Japan, India, and the Philippines in a war at once and it would be over in a week with a decisive Chinese victory and minimal losses. By portraying it as weak and incapable of dispatching even US vassals without great loss, you are feeding the idea that it is in exactly the same situation and power dynamic as Russia. It isn't. And believing that it is leads to enormously erroneous and dangerous conclusions, like that China should involve itself in the Russo Ukrainian war.
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
bettydice said:
No one is going to believe such bluffing of China. China would not dare to do a nuclear retaliation strike against the US because China will be nuked back by the US. Besides, Taiwan is right in front of China while the US is far away from China's nuclear arsenal. Taiwan can strike China far quicker than China's retaliation strike reaches the US.
Click to expand...
China would dare. That's absurd to think no one will think the US isn't responsible. That's why the US isn't going sneak in nukes to Taiwan. If Taiwan used nukes first, China has the right to nuke it out of existence which it can being a small land mass. Are the Taiwanese that dumb not to know that? Is Taiwan going to have a thousand nukes? No, it won't have enough to stop China hence why they wouldn't because they'll be nuked out of existence.

I love how the US side thinks like terrorists. Taiwan will never have enough nukes to provide any tactical value so they only can be used as terror weapons to discourage China from attack. Taiwanese don't think that way because they side with the US who cares about human rights...? Like how you hear Taiwanese think striking the Three Gorges Dam hoping to kill millions of civilians along the way is a victory to them?
 
H

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
AssassinsMace said:
China would dare. That's absurd to think no one will think the US isn't responsible. That's why the US isn't going sneak in nukes to Taiwan. If Taiwan used nukes first, China has the right to nuke it out of existence which it can being a small land mass. Are the Taiwanese that dumb not to know that? Is Taiwan going to have a thousand nukes? No, it won't have enough to stop China hence why they wouldn't because they'll be nuked out of existence.

I love how the US side thinks like terrorists. Taiwan will never have enough nukes to provide any tactical value so they only can be used as terror weapons to discourage China from attack. Taiwanese don't think that way because they side with the US who cares about human rights...? Like how you hear Taiwanese think striking the Three Gorges Dam hoping to kill millions of civilians along the way is a victory to them?
Click to expand...

Aren't you worried about what the International Community will think?

1685654524905.png
 
E

Eventine

Junior Member
Registered Member
Boltzmann said:
You're doing it again. I understand you don't mean to promote a Sino Russian alliance or spread Russian narratives but that is nevertheless what you are doing

China is not Russia. Repeat that to yourself until you believe it. Their capabilities are on different planets. One only has to look at gdp figures to deduce this. China could engage Japan, India, and the Philippines in a war at once and it would be over in a week with a decisive Chinese victory and minimal losses. By portraying it as weak and incapable of dispatching even US vassals without great loss, you are feeding the idea that it is in exactly the same situation and power dynamic as Russia. It isn't. And believing that it is leads to enormously erroneous and dangerous conclusions, like that China should involve itself in the Russo Ukrainian war.
Click to expand...
There's no such thing as a war with Japan that lasts a week. Even if you defeat their navy in a week, you'd have to invade or embargo them into a surrender. Perfect opportunity for the US to create a new Ukraine through submarine warfare and getting the Japanese to fight house to house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top