plawolf
Lieutenant General
But ‘Defiler of Couches’ would be more appropriate, as I didn’t hear the Couches ever saying ‘Yes’.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
But ‘Defiler of Couches’ would be more appropriate, as I didn’t hear the Couches ever saying ‘Yes’.
What's the significance of this militarily.
Is it essentially a non-nuclear neutron bomb that can fry electronics without the destruction or residual radiation??
Does it still have destructive impact of a hydrogen bomb? It's not super clear from the article, as it's behind paywall.
It's a thermobaric weapon. Not at all a "hydrogen bomb" or anything of the sort.
Looks like it is meant to be used underwater, so an anti-submarine depth charge or torpedo warhead?
Just adds another layer of guarantee that China can't be invaded.
The EU is no "friend" to China. White people will always side with white people when the option of ganging up on Asians exists.
Their attitude of acting better than everyone else despite their dwindling influence being a blip in the face of recorded human history make them insufferable. The jungle has come to collect from garden.
Secondly, what does global perception of Galwan matter? Russian propaganda will not change the facts in theater when the Indians try to do Forward Policy again off their copium-fueled delirium.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
It’s a bit of a clickbait by conflating this new weapon with the Hydrogen Bomb.
This new explosive is just a potentially more capable incendiary weapon similar to existing fuel-air explosive weapons. But the core ingredient, magnesium-hydride is going to be a massive bottleneck, since it’s usually only able to be produced in microscopic quantities in labs, and China’s first commercial scale factory will only make 150 tons of the stuff per year.
....
"An alternative to Aukus: why a strategic defensive approach best suits Australia
Missiles and drones are a better buy when compared with the nuclear-powered submarines Australia hopes to acquire from the US[...]"
....
"An alternative to Aukus: why a strategic defensive approach best suits Australia
Missiles and drones are a better buy when compared with the nuclear-powered submarines Australia hopes to acquire from the US[...]"
....
Last edited:
plawolf
Lieutenant General
China doesn’t let emotions distract it from making the best decisions for China.
Yes, the Europeans are arrogant white supremacists with rapidly waning power. But that doesn’t mean China should push them into America’s corner needlessly.
Unlike the Americans, China prefers to keep its potential enemies divided and potential for as long as possible, instead of needlessly making them into a united forced firmly against you.
Furthermore, China is a firm believer in not telegraphing your intentions needlessly early to allow your opponent more time to prepare than absolutely necessary. The Europeans are lazy and arrogant and declining, but they still command a massive population pool with significant inheritance in industry, technology and material wealth. If they get scared enough to arm up in a proper way, they can put up a significant fight. Why give them that opportunity?
If the Europeans unwisely side with America in a hot war against China, that is when China will unleash the floodgates of lethal aid to Russia, with a massive side helping of PLA frontline combat divisions.
Unless and until that happens, China is more than happy for the Europeans to continue to burn through their arms and ammo stocks making the Russians more and more angry. Which in turn creates greater deterrence against the Europeans getting involved in a hot war against China in the first place.
The best outcome is to not have to fight a war to get what you want. Because war is expensive in both lives and treasure. Even if the PLA can achieve a 100-1 kill ration against the Europeans, how many Chinese families would have to grieve the loss of sons and fathers to chew through the millions of conscripts the Europeans could theoretically press gang to the front, Ukraine style? How much money would be wasted killing then that could instead have been used to improve the lives of countless Chinese citizens? China is only in the position it is today because it has the wisdom and discipline to not take the easy road to instant gratification of war to solve all its problems and challenges as the west had.