Miscellaneous News

Quan8410 said:

Because they think that it's China that impose communism to them and by getting rid of communism, they will be the next Japan and South Korea. They always thought that they are more cultured and better than Japan and South Korea. They are trying to impose a myth on Vietnamese youth that in the past Vietnam was on way richer than Japan and Korea despite based on data, not really the case.

Click to expand...

The Commies of Vietnam are doing this to their own people? Lol what planet are those folks from anyways planet Jai Hind?

Ho Chi Minh was a commie that founded the new Vietnam and last time I checked those Vietnamese Commies were more enamored with the Soviet Russia than Commie China which is why the war with Vietnam and China back in 1979 had to happen.

But man, China can't seem to catch a break with any countries regardless of ethnicity and political orientation. The Commies in Vietnam seems to want to align itself with the country that bombed them back to stone age which is America; is more than friendly with countries that committed untold atrocities against their own people like the South Koreans, and the Imperial Japanese is more than friendly with Taiwan. Yet somehow am being told that the problems countries like Vietnam face would magically all go away if those dastardly CCP goes and melt away?

Eventine said:

Where have I been proven wrong again...? Outside of industrial output (and its proxies, raw material consumption / electricity consumption), there is no metric in which China + partners is equal to NATO + partners.

And even in industrial output, China + partners are barely even with NATO + partners. You realize Japan and South Korea are in that group, yes? And that Russia isn't even in the top 10?

For scientific output, China's share among top quality papers is any where from 23% to 27%, depending on the source. But that is not comparable to the Western alliance. You can look at the raw data here:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. China is at the top, but the US is a close second, and if you combine the other countries of the Western alliance on the list, they remain dominant.

So yes, China has overtaken the US, but just the US, not the Western alliance - beating the US is not enough and has never been enough.



Kazakhstan is in military alliance with Russia? Then what military aid have they sent to Russia? What equipment have they donated, what support have they provided, what sanctions have they violated for the sake of Russia?

Hungary is sympathetic to Russia, sure, and one could argue its membership in the Western alliance is merely symbolic. But it's still doing the minimum warranted by its alliance treaty. By contrast, Kazakhstan hasn't done a thing for Russia.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Kazakhstan is acting more like a NATO partner than a Russian ally, and what's actually embarrassing is you refusing to acknowledge this simple fact - which is that China's partners are incredibly weak, while the Western alliance outside of the US, contrary to popular belief, is quite strong. Japan + South Korea + EU + Canada + Australia + UK are a formidable group in their own right, comparable in nearly every metric to the US. So it's like fighting two United States, which head to head, is impossible even for China.

Click to expand...

How many of US' so called allies would actually attack China if it came down to it though? Even Korea and Japan are questionable at best. I strongly doubt EU will send ships halfway around the world to invade China.

The skies go up high, and the emperor is far away. That is more true than ever for the American empire.

Even just intra-EU cooperation is not a given. It's one thing to muster all the warlords to verbally agree to an agenda at the emperor's table. It's another to ensure said fiefdoms actually act in an efficient and cooperative way.

In contrast, China is a single state, with access to comparable resources, albeit not manpower, as the whole West. It is much easier for China to coordinate it's own actions than it is for US + all it's claimed subjects.

The above hypothesis was proved in the Ukraine war, when the power of US' bloc, which is supposed to have 1.5x as much economic/hard power as China, failed to make significant dents into Russia, an ally that is only on the level of Germany or UK. From now on, China does in fact know for certain that as long as they play on the fact that US is neither an united or well run imperium, they can keep poking holes in them.

Beating the US is enough. Destroying the emperor's own forces will make all his questionably loyal warlords piss themselves. As long as China doesn't back the whole US aligned movement into a corner where there's no choice for them all but to fight. Which if you have noticed, is why China is channeling US to come to China instead of hitting EU or threatening Mexico or whatever.

bajingan said:

Just want to correct you on one thing, China does have a military alliance with North Korea, they have a NATO style article 2 defence treaty, it declares the two nations undertake all necessary measures to oppose any country or coalition of countries that might attack either nation, so since North Korea acknowledged that taiwan is part of China, so in theory any war between the US and China over taiwan, North Korea is treaty bound to provide military assistance to China.

So i don't believe for a second that Japan and South Korea will fight China directly over taiwan, sending arms possibly but fight directly no, unless if they want to fight a two front war against North Korea

Click to expand...

I think China would only activate the treaty if SK and Japan was part of the invasion. It's not like NK can do too much against US in the ocean, if US keeps the war limited.

I believe you can automatically discount South Korea's economic/industrial power from any potential invasion of China scenario, because if they invade, they're so close to the defenders' artillery and ground forces that they will become a country sized Bakhmut, they would not be productive in anything but refugees.

FriedRiceNSpice said:

I think you are severely underestimating the importance of software and computing power to a modern advanced economy. Software encompasses much more than just PC operating systems. Software is a critical driver of the next stage of China's industrial evolution. Rather than downplaying the importance of software, a more correct assessment is that measuring the level of software industry using financial terms is inaccurate. In terms of legacy and lower-level (low level from a technical definition, not correlated with value/importance) software, there is simply no need to re-invent the wheel when there are plenty of open source solutions for which access cannot be cut off. In terms of newer flavors of software, China is competitive, and the Chinese software industry is probably the only industry in the world that can compete with the US software industry. China has a huge competitive advantage in terms of cost and talent pool when compared to the West. Having access to significantly larger pool of high quality talent will provide a massive advantage to software industry, hence why the US is scrambling to tighten its grip on and get entrenched across it's traditional tech markets in order to pre-empty competition from China. Chinese tech companies need to continue to aggressively expand in markets in services such as cloud computing that are not too tightly controlled by US influence in order to secure revenues to continue to fund investment in and development of its tech industry.

Click to expand...

Software is highly important. However it is hard to revoke at will unlike physical hardware. If no EUV machine sold to you there is no alternative. If no design program sold to you then you just never update and go with old software. It is also hard to make software embargo without affect regular sale. Lastly the crucial industrial software (that is worth embargoing) we are talking about are only a tiny % of the overall software market.

Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam all have the same mentality that a resurgence of China means that they would be again to be dominated by China. For millennium, China was the sole great power in East Asia. Many of kings of South Korea and Vietnam would need to seek China's recognition for legitimacy.

Therefore, from their prospective, a powerful China is not in their interests. Even though the US has been a bigger threat to Vietnam and become an overlord to South Korea and Japan, they still see the US as lesser of the threat to their interests than China. In addition, all of them wish China would break apart like it did before so that Japan, South Korea and Vietnam could again compete for dominated power in East Asia. If the US could defeat China, then even if they don't get the big piece of pie, they would still get some piece of the pie.

Eventine said:

Since when were Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and CSTO outside of Russia, allies of China? Do you really think any of these countries will join with China in an attack on Taiwan, or will help China if it were attacked by the West? Do you really believe they wouldn't maintain neutrality?

Click to expand...

Thats fucking hilarious because I am the one telling you you should not be comparing NATO to Chinese economic partners in first place. See below: I am not the one doing the comparison, you are.

Eventine said:

It seems obvious to me that China and its close partners - Russia, North Korea, Iran - are ins ufficient to form an alliance of equal power to the Western alliance. They simply don't own enough of the world's land, resources, and markets. The rest of the Global South are also not likely to rally behind China, but constitute third parties, where China's influence will be challenged by the Western alliance. Their best play under game theory is to side with whoever gives them the better deal for the time being; and to keep their diplomacy flexible. Counting on the Global South to take China's side is not wise.

Click to expand...

Unless you think Iran will intervene in Taiwan for China lol. They might start up trouble in Middle East, but thats what they always do with or without China.

TK3600 said:

Well for one these are partners, not alliances, so they are not comparable to NATO. But if you insist to compare them the assessment is wrong. Russia is literally the largest country by far, that is a lot of land. China is also a huge country. Most of Asia is bigger than western Europe and North America by quite a bit. It is the Europeans who are low on resources. Most of NATO resources comes from new world like North America and Australia. The rest are sourced from global south like Africa, Middle East. Meanwhile China and his partners are sitting on some of the best resource rich regions. Countries like Russia, China have near monopoly on much of the minerals, and more than half of oils (Russia, Saudi Arabia). The rest of resources are in global south like Africa which China has bigger influence on.

Click to expand...

^ My original reply that is still relevant.

Saudi Arabia is listed as economic partner because they are the biggest seller of oil to China, and has shown to resist US demand for increased production. They coordinated with Russia to reduce production instead. That is why they are economically China/Russia aligned.

Eventine said:

Where have I been proven wrong again...?

Kazakhstan is in military alliance with Russia? Then what military aid have they sent to Russia? What equipment have they donated, what support have they provided, what sanctions have they violated for the sake of Russia?

Click to expand...

Speaking of being proven wrong, here is stuff about Russian military aid to Kazakhstan.


"They work together within the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), and through more than 60 bilateral agreements that regulate defense and military-technical cooperation."

"Joint military cooperation fully involves almost all aspects of their security policy and other related activities, from conducting joint military exercises, especially within the framework of the CSTO (three were conducted in 2010, and as many are scheduled for 2011), the production of weapons and military technology, the training of military personnel (over 15,000 Kazakhstani soldiers were trained at Russian military facilities between 1992 and 2005), to the sharing of military facilities and installations."

Eventine said:

Kazakhstan is acting more like a NATO partner than a Russian ally, and what's actually embarrassing is you refusing to acknowledge this simple fact - which is that China's partners are incredibly weak, while the Western alliance outside of the US, contrary to popular belief, is quite strong. Japan + South Korea + EU + Canada + Australia + UK are a formidable group in their own right, comparable in nearly every metric to the US. So it's like fighting two United States, which head to head, is impossible even for China.

Click to expand...

Kazakstan is in formal military alliance with Russia. There will be some squabbles here and there, tough luck. Hungary blocks aid initiative to Ukraine in EU. North Korea purged pro-Chinese faction. Turkey blocked Sweden into NATO. US spies on German chancellor cell-phone. Russia harassed Chinese BRI until recently. That is just normal stuff. But back on topic to economics, Kazakhstan is a US puppet right? Let's see what US government is saying:



Totally what NATO ally do. 睁眼说瞎话

Biscuits said:

How many of US' so called allies would actually attack China if it came down to it though? [...]

Click to expand...

All the Anglo nations!

Biscuits said:

How many of US' so called allies would actually attack China if it came down to it though? Even Korea and Japan are questionable at best. I strongly doubt EU will send ships halfway around the world to invade China.

The skies go up high, and the emperor is far away. That is more true than ever for the American empire.

Even just intra-EU cooperation is not a given. It's one thing to muster all the warlords to verbally agree to an agenda at the emperor's table. It's another to ensure said fiefdoms actually act in an efficient and cooperative way.

In contrast, China is a single state, with access to comparable resources, albeit not manpower, as the whole West. It is much easier for China to coordinate it's own actions than it is for US + all it's claimed subjects.

The above hypothesis was proved in the Ukraine war, when the power of US' bloc, which is supposed to have 1.5x as much economic/hard power as China, failed to make significant dents into Russia, an ally that is only on the level of Germany or UK. From now on, China does in fact know for certain that as long as they play on the fact that US is neither an united or well run imperium, they can keep poking holes in them.

Beating the US is enough. Destroying the emperor's own forces will make all his questionably loyal warlords piss themselves. As long as China doesn't back the whole US aligned movement into a corner where there's no choice for them all but to fight. Which if you have noticed, is why China is channeling US to come to China instead of hitting EU or threatening Mexico or whatever.

Click to expand...

I agree. This is the part I do not understand. We are already seeing what western alliance maximum economic pressure is like on Russia. It makes no sense to speculate about it.

Current Russia is under that exact same challenge proposed by Eventine. The power is not to be underestimated, but ultimately it failed to cause big problem after initial year. Now Russia is doing fine recovering. I believe China will be more resilient than Russia given much much bigger economic power, and the fact there is no more element of surprise seeing Russian example.

TK3600 said:

Software is highly important. However it is hard to revoke at will unlike physical hardware. If no EUV machine sold to you there is no alternative. If no design program sold to you then you just never update and go with old software. It is also hard to make software embargo without affect regular sale. Lastly the crucial industrial software (that is worth embargoing) we are talking about are only a tiny % of the overall software market.

Click to expand...

I am not really concerned about finding domestic alternatives to existing software being used in China or any attempts at embargoing software that are doomed to fail. I am talking more about the potential for China to move beyond the export of manufactured goods and into the export of software services as well. Exporting software as a service in fields such as cloud computing, AI/ML services, and software platforms targeted at consumers to overseas markets. Increasing revenues from overseas markets to further invest in innovation and R&D and creating more high paying jobs domestically. China has the resources and potential to compete in the lucrative global software/IT services market, especially in new and emerging fields.

FriedRiceNSpice said:

I am not really concerned about finding domestic alternatives to existing software being used in China or any attempts at embargoing software that are doomed to fail. I am talking more about the potential for China to move beyond the export of manufactured goods and into the export of software services as well. Exporting software as a service in fields such as cloud computing, AI/ML services, and software platforms targeted at consumers to overseas markets. Increasing revenues from overseas markets to further invest in innovation and R&D and creating more high paying jobs domestically. China has the resources and potential to compete in the lucrative global software/IT services market, especially in new and emerging fields.

Click to expand...

Indeed China is lagging a bit on the software side. The foundation is there, but we are not seeing much international success yet. What do you think is the reason?