PLA (strategic) news, pics, and videos

B

Biscuits

Colonel
Registered Member
00CuriousObserver said:

Xi Struggles to Keep Military Construction Reform on Course at Two Sessions​

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



While reports like these are very speculative, I think the politics/"people" side of PLA should be given more attention
Click to expand...
Isn't it very hypocritical of an US publication to say corruption affects the PLA to a significant degree when the US military is THE poster child of corruption?

Today's PLA is nearly as large numerically as the US military, and based on the amount, quality of programs, handles more financial funding than the Pentagon + Boeing, Palantir et al. One would be an absolute idiot to think this is anywhere near a 100% efficient system.

Yet we also have good indication that this is the best system among any alternatives. There is no military which can claim higher efficiency at the same size and funding.
 
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Biscuits said:
Isn't it very hypocritical of an US publication to say corruption affects the PLA to a significant degree when the US military is THE poster child of corruption?

Today's PLA is nearly as large numerically as the US military, and based on the amount, quality of programs, handles more financial funding than the Pentagon + Boeing, Palantir et al. One would be an absolute idiot to think this is anywhere near a 100% efficient system.

Yet we also have good indication that this is the best system among any alternatives. There is no military which can claim higher efficiency at the same size and funding.
Click to expand...

The real question is does the Chinese MIC buy engines of Taobao?
 
00CuriousObserver

00CuriousObserver

Junior Member
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
Isn't it very hypocritical of an US publication to say corruption affects the PLA to a significant degree when the US military is THE poster child of corruption?

Today's PLA is nearly as large numerically as the US military, and based on the amount, quality of programs, handles more financial funding than the Pentagon + Boeing, Palantir et al. One would be an absolute idiot to think this is anywhere near a 100% efficient system.

Yet we also have good indication that this is the best system among any alternatives. There is no military which can claim higher efficiency at the same size and funding.
Click to expand...

Sure, but I don't think that's a good angle. Also, the politics and people aspects of the PLA are not just about corruption; they also affect combat readiness. Paying more for toys is whatever, but being less capable of going to war is an entirely different matter.
 
B

Biscuits

Colonel
Registered Member
00CuriousObserver said:
Sure, but I don't think that's a good angle.
Click to expand...
What is not a good angle?
00CuriousObserver said:
Also, the politics and people aspects of the PLA are not just about corruption; they also affect combat readiness.
Click to expand...
Yeah and?
00CuriousObserver said:
Paying more for toys is whatever, but being less capable of going to war is an entirely different matter.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's my point, you don't contradict me on that yet what do you mean by you don't think it's a good angle?

Having the "best" out of many worse systems grant an advantage in everything, not just cost but also combat readiness.
 
00CuriousObserver

00CuriousObserver

Junior Member
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
What is not a good angle?
Click to expand...

The whataboutism. Sure, there is definitely value in considering the bigger picture in that all of this is relative, but we are PLA watching and viewing it too much through the lens of "oh but the US is this" would affect our own PLA analysis.

Even when comparing the effects of internal politics and corruption across the two militaries, you still need to gain an accurate understanding of each topic first
 
B

Biscuits

Colonel
Registered Member
00CuriousObserver said:
The whataboutism. Sure, there is definitely value in considering the bigger picture in that all of this is relative, but we are PLA watching and viewing it too much through the lens of "oh but the US is this" would affect our own PLA analysis.
Click to expand...
What you're saying makes no sense, military inefficiency is a relative measure

It's like saying "oh Switzerland is a poor country with a lot poverty" and when someone says "but evidently they aren't that poor because they have a higher income than at least China or US", you suddenly say that's "whataboutism"?

Make it make sense please.
 
00CuriousObserver

00CuriousObserver

Junior Member
Registered Member
Biscuits said:
What you're saying makes no sense, military inefficiency is a relative measure

It's like saying "oh Switzerland is a poor country with a lot poverty" and when someone says "but evidently they aren't that poor because they have a higher income than at least China or US", you suddenly say that's "whataboutism"?

Make it make sense please.
Click to expand...

I will go with your example. In your example, it would be akin to saying "here is a report on Switzerland's poverty", and your comment is "but the US is poorer, and they're reporting Switzerland's poverty".

Sure, that might be true, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't analyze the issue in isolation. And before we can conclude that "the US is poorer", we need to first have a good understanding of Switzerland's state—which means doing the former.
 
Wrought

Wrought

Junior Member
Registered Member
It is incredibly difficult to manage a bureaucracy of this size and scale. I always liked
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from September 10, 2001.

The topic today is an adversary that poses a threat, a serious threat, to the security of the United States of America. This adversary is one of the world's last bastions of central planning. It governs by dictating five-year plans. From a single capital, it attempts to impose its demands across time zones, continents, oceans and beyond. With brutal consistency, it stifles free thought and crushes new ideas. It disrupts the defense of the United States and places the lives of men and women in uniform at risk.

Perhaps this adversary sounds like the former Soviet Union, but that enemy is gone: our foes are more subtle and implacable today. You may think I'm describing one of the last decrepit dictators of the world. But their day, too, is almost past, and they cannot match the strength and size of this adversary.

The adversary's closer to home. It's the Pentagon bureaucracy.​
Click to expand...

Needless to say, Rumsfeld's efforts towards bureaucratic reform very quickly became yesterday's topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top