antiterror13
Brigadier
What is "onus" ?
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Looks like Blinken only got private arguments with Qin Gang and Wang Yi. From the readout it seems Ukraine is probably getting the Korea treatment real soon, with or without Zelensky's approval.
Mr. Shades in the meeting is apparently Sullivan's younger brother.
Last edited:
Railroads take just hours to repair if load bearing elements of a bridge are not damaged. Railway bridges are much harder to destroy than most expect.
and total width 14 meters. Only a penetrating hit on the load bearing part will collapse the structure by definition.
CEP of PGMs is ~5 meters. However, the error distribution is not a perfect circle. Ranging is more difficult to get right than angular direction. This means that its easier to hit the bridge parallel to the rail than perpendicular to the rail. However that means for gravity bombing, you need to fly parallel to the rail, which is easy to predict, and air defenses can be laid in ambush.
If you fly perpendicular to the rail, the flight path is less predictable, but then you have to deal with the increased range error.
A railway bridge is made of reinforced concrete. That means normal semi-armor piercing warheads are unlikely to be effective. Here's what a non-effective hit looks like: a 3000 kg primitive 'missile' (a kamikaze plane) crashing into just 25 mm of steel plating does nothing but slightly burn the paint.
While carbon steel has tensile and compressive strength ~10x higher than concrete, concrete piles are also 6.5 meter thick rather than 0.025 meters thick.
So it looks like you need a bunker buster. These are very heavy munitions. What kind of range do they have?
. Its range is ~15 km. Heavier ones have less range. These severely cut into range and air to air loadout for strike fighters, while requiring strategic bombers to approach to basically point blank range.
So how would anyone attack Chinese bridge infrastructure? The only way is to attain air supremacy - even air superiority won't do, as even inferior PAVN fighters in Vietnam were able to force F-4s to drop their strike payloads.
Attaining air supremacy over Russia or China - something they could not even do against tiny Vietnam - is unlikely.
D
Deleted member 24525
Guest
Where are you getting the part about Ukraine?
双方还就共同关心的国际和地区问题交换了意见
It's pretty obvious what this line refers to. The US doesn't need China's permission to escalate the conflict in Ukraine, so its obvious what Blinken wants.
Honestly, who really cares, it’s not like it’s going to change anything in their home countries much because everyone already has enough problems as it is
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
It reminds me of the riots in Tibet before the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics. Remember when CNN edited a picture with an APC (CNN called it a tank) driving down the street where they only showed two rioters making it look like overkill by the Chinese. Then someone released the actual photo and whole street was lined up with rioting Tibetans throwing rocks.
:
Bill Gates reflects on his China visit:
Unsure on this, TPP feels like a Zelensky type to steal votes, I'd still go with KMT.
Bill Gates reflects on his China visit:
Unsure on this, TPP feels like a Zelensky type to steal votes, I'd still go with KMT.
4-year-old Status-quo Taiwan People’s Party , poll suggests
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Several obvious problems with that approach.
Firstly, at the most superficial financial level, one does not simply buy a majority stake in a major company on the stock market since there will never be that amount of shares just floating around. Usually such stakes comes at a significant premium above and beyond the listed share price of the shares precisely because of the controlling stake aspect of the buy. To simply dump the shares at market value would mean a significant net loss on the investment for Sinochem. Indeed, there just won’t be the normal market demand to absorb all those shares, and as soon as a certain percentage threshold is reached (which will be far below Sinochem’s holdings), every professional trader in the world will know what is going on, and the share price will nosedive and Sinochem will need to stop selling or take a massive loss on the share sales. As soon as the fire sale is over, the company share price will rebound, so it won’t do any lasting damage beyond to Sinochem’s bank account.
Secondly, as already mentioned by others, this move sets an unacceptable precedent that must be strongly, and I would argue, disproportionately resisted and punished. Doing anything less risks opening the floodgates to similar Chinese-Exclusion-Act-2.0 level discriminatory clauses popping up all over the place as greedy western politicians and their rich puppeteers look to effectively rob China of all its overseas investments.
In many ways, this is a perfect illustration on why China should never, and will never limit its military preparedness to merely being able to defeat western military misadventures in China’s backyard. This is a key reason why Chinese military modernisation and expansion is focused so much on the navy and expeditionary combat capabilities.
If Chinese military might is purely defensive and geographically limited to its own homeland, there is little China can do to protect its overseas investments from being plundered like what happened to Russian assets. And China doesn’t have to have done anything wrong for that to have happened. All it would take is for the west to find some pretext to start a war with China, and then re-write the law books to make it perfectly ‘legal’ to seize Chinese state and private assets when they come to fight China and loose. In order to safeguard Chinese foreign investments, China needs to develop and maintain the expeditionary hard military power needed to come to the homes of the Europeans and take what they stole back.