Miscellaneous News

siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Biscuits said:
Meh US is just flip flopping between threats to invade China because it knows threatening to invade is the only way they can get any leverage/bargaining power nowadays.

They themselves are not really ready. US would need to achieve more domestic goods independence first if they're to sustain a long war. Plus it's extremely dubious if the US can utilise full mobilization and draft.

It's like USSR constantly threatening to roll through western Europe during the cold war. Military is all they have so they use military threats to bargain. I give it a 8/10 chance that America's military will never manage to attack China, they'll fizzle out on some random proxy war first. Maybe Ukraine, Syria or Iran. As long as China keeps nudging them into costly conflicts.

Especially if EU is taken off the geopolitical board by Russia. Without EU, US' bloc will officially have smaller gdp than China's bloc. Although we already know gdp is secondary to industrial/tech capability, this is still an important threshold.
Click to expand...

What makes you think it is only domestic goods dependence?

1663559271902.jpeg
 
B

Biscuits

Colonel
Registered Member
jwnz said:
CBS News: Biden tells 60 Minutes U.S. troops would defend Taiwan, but White House says this is not official U.S. policy.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So this is what the US calls strategic ambiguity
Click to expand...
Keyword: "if there was an unprecedented attack"

So in other words its not a promise to invade China, its a threat that they will invade if something "unprecedented" happened which they define themselves based on if they're ready to invade or not (they're not).

It's more USSR and fulda gap style malarkey.
 
J

jwnz

Junior Member
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
Keyword: "if there was an unprecedented attack"

So in other words its not a promise to invade China, its a threat that they will invade if something "unprecedented" happened which they define themselves based on if they're ready to invade or not (they're not).

It's more USSR and fulda gap style malarkey.
Click to expand...
It won't be unprecedented as technically the civil war has not ended, so there are plenty of precedents of one side attacking the other during a civil war.
 
Temstar

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Overbom said:
Imagine thinking that this was an accident lol
Click to expand...
Weather or not US intervenes depend on China's strength and not what the president says or doesn't say.

However, the point is people have to constantly walking back Biden tells us there are lots of factions within US government and they're trying to pull in different directions, and that Biden isn't really in charge. It's unbecoming for a supposed hegemon.
 
B

Biscuits

Colonel
Registered Member
jwnz said:
It won't be unprecedented as technically the civil war has not ended, so there are plenty of precedents of one side attacking the other during a civil war.
Click to expand...
That's one of the excuses they can give yeah. Also, Beijing could without much difficulty force the rebels into firing the first shot using economic starvation tactics.

Announce that shipping will now for national security reasons be rerouted to Fujian first, with any weapons or dual use items being seized there. Freeze all of ROC's assets with only a few exceptions. Ban the ROC leadership from leaving China. Put the whole province on travel lockdown. Not necessarily in that order.

None of that would be an attack, but it will force the rebel leadership to pursue kinetic solutions against government forces, giving China the excuse it needs to mop them up defensively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top