Trump 2.0 official thread

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
But my impression is that Trump seeks to leverage his market and security umbrella to force the ROW to make a binary choice between the U.S. and China, which if successful would be significantly more damaging.

I agree that losing access to critical Chinese inputs, whether in the form of raw materials or industrial products, would be very damaging to the U.S. and its allies / vassals, but given Trump's latest moves I suspect that he and the admin might be willing to risk it for the sake of DPRK-izing China.
No possible. The rest of the world doesn't have the electricity generation capacity to produce all the goods China produces.
1744229713056.png
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
China should have started spending at least twice that on defence from 20 years ago. To start now it's simply too late. The pressing issue would have been to reduce the gap in strategic systems, nukes and SSBNs so that any ideas of the US somehow surviving relatively unscathed in a nuclear war against China would have been completely burried. Additional tactical and power projection assets would have been useful too (more modern planes, carriers etc.), but that is secondary to guaranteed MAD.
China started our military buildup later with 3 advantages:

1. It made us look unthreatening for as long as possible, which is the opposite of what the Soviets did. It allowed us to milk the US/West for money and technological cooperations when we were still weak and needed them. They weren't scared and thought we didn't even have MAD in place.
2. It prevents a buildup of legacy systems especially when Chinese military tech is moving so fast. At a time when Chinese military machines were qualitatively worse than their American counterparts, building a horde of them meant higher maintenance for things that because quickly obsolete. Waiting for technological parity or superiority to build in mass means you will eventually have a leaner, more effective force.
3. Economy and tech grow in a snowballing fashion, so the more you could put into it (and not invest into the military) at early points, the faster the snowball builds and the faster you get past the point where the West could still suppress China.

The danger to this would have been if the US realized too quickly and attempted to pull a Thucydides' trap before we were prepared. But that window is closed now because the instant China sensed hostile competition with the US, we quickly and heavily built up our nuclear forces with modern and advanced missiles, to prevent American adventurism.
 
Last edited:

SinoAmericanCW

Junior Member
Registered Member
China started our military buildup later with 2 advantages:

1. It made us look unthreatening for as long as possible, which is the opposite of what the Soviets did. It allowed us to milk the US/West for money and technological cooperations when we were still weak and needed them. They weren't scared and thought we didn't even have MAD in place.
2. It prevents a buildup of legacy systems especially when Chinese military tech is moving so fast. At a time when Chinese military machines were qualitatively worse than their American counterparts, building a horde of them meant higher maintenance for things that because quickly obsolete. Waiting for technological parity or superiority to build in mass means you will eventually have a leaner, more effective force.

The danger to this would have been if the US realized too quickly and attempted to pull a Thucydides' trap before we were prepared. But that window is closed now because the instant China sensed hostile competition with the US, we quickly and heavily built up our nuclear forces, to prevent American adventurism.
Agreed. I'd add that the September 11 terror attacks and the subsequent 'War on Terror' probably saved China from having to face U.S. hostility at an earlier stage of modernization.
 

iewgnem

Senior Member
Registered Member
The thing is that Trump is trying to buy himself 90 more days of vital Chinese supplies by inviting China to rerout goods with minimal tariffs.

Never give an enemy what they want or need.

To elaborate on collective punishment, this means denying US and anyone affiliated with US from a chance to reroute critical goods. I think now the best way is to put a transnational income tax on US multinationals. China needs not directly totally embargo US, it is more advantegous to let US embargo itself by implementing the promised worldwide tariffs. And when Trump sees how badly an income tax would wreck US stock markets (including raping all of his insider trading friends), he will either have to surrender or end the 90 day deadline.
I say let them reroute, re-routing over the last 7 years is why China's prepared and US isn't. Besides two facts are already established: nobody will be moving any factories anywhere, be it Vietnam or US with 90 day (or who knows how long) planning horizon, and 2 - Chinese suppliers are already cutting off their US clients purely because it's too much trouble.

The fact that Trump just admitted on camera that he folded because "people got yippy" (legs shaking) means chances are he will fold on China too, the question is will Beijing let them off the hook or keep the punishment up.
 

mack8

Junior Member
China is rapidly scaling up its strategic forces. Under current trends, it should have parity in deployed warheads by 2035.

IMO, the biggest issue is the conventional rather than the nuclear balance. The PLAAF and the PLAN need to close the gap with the USAF and USN fast, and then surpass them.

Key platforms that need to be inducted in greater numbers include, off the top of my head:

-VLO combat aircraft (5th and 6th gens + H-20 bomber)
-Anti-submarine warfare platforms, both fixed-wing aircraft and shipborne helicopters
-Aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships
-Nuclear attack subs
I fully agree with the above, my point being that China could have really used having this kind of parity (or near it) today, rather than in 10 years or more from now. It would have made the likes of Trump think twice before doing what they're doing now, especially in regards to any potential kinetic provocation.
 

SinoAmericanCW

Junior Member
Registered Member
I fully agree with the above, my point being that China could have really used having this kind of parity (or near it) today, rather than in 10 years or more from now. It would have made the likes of Trump think twice before doing what they're doing now, especially in regards to any potential kinetic provocation.
With China already at ~600 warheads, I think the window for U.S. nuclear escalation has already passed.

As for Trump, I don't think he's seeking kinetic provocation. What he's seeking, rather, is to strangle China with a wall of U.S. and vassal states tariffs, while dissuading China from breaking out of the stranglehold with the shield provided by the USAF and the USN. In effect, it's an adaptation of the strategy the U.S. has used on North Korea for the past couple decades.

I fully expect kinetic escalation to come from China, because China would improve its position by breaking out of containment.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Agreed. I'd add that the September 11 terror attacks and the subsequent 'War on Terror' probably saved China from having to face U.S. hostility at an earlier stage of modernization.
Maybe but at that time, China really wasn't that much of a threat to the US yet so it's debatable.
I fully agree with the above, my point being that China could have really used having this kind of parity (or near it) today, rather than in 10 years or more from now. It would have made the likes of Trump think twice before doing what they're doing now, especially in regards to any potential kinetic provocation.
Yeah, but to get there 10 years ago, we'd have to have picked up building 20 years ago, and at that technological point, we wouldn't be putting out 055A or 052D or 054A; we'd just have a whole bunch of 052B and crud like that. I don't think we want to be in that situation where we have a ton of ships that are too good to scrap but not good enough to fight advanced foes with.
 

JJD1803

Junior Member
Registered Member
The 125% tariffs on China still hold. Which means inflation is about to spike. The US trade representative just said the tariff on Canada,Mexico on steel,aluminum and some auto are still on. Means more inflation. The Fed isn’t to lower rates. They might have to raise them depending how bad inflation gets. This is going to hurt big box retailers leading to more layoffs. And small businesses that depend on cheap Chinese goods are about to face bankruptcy. More layoffs on the way.

Also the 70 nations that agree to negotiate doesn’t mean an agreement is made. It simply means they are talking. Who is to say these nations will agree to de-industrialize themselves and strengthen their currencies for the sake of the US? Some may bend the knee but not all. I think ultimately Trump will demand them cease all trading with China. He is celebrating this as a victory but no concessions was given.

What were the point of tariffs? They said it was for revenue. They then said it was for negotiations. And they said to bring industry to the US. It is all convoluted and makes no sense. People are correct to say the US has effectively destroyed trust. Just because you are a superpower doesn’t mean you bully the world into submission. People won’t forget. Hell the Roman Empire has more tact than the US. The US just wants even more tribute from all its vassals. This is going to increase resentment and accelerate de-dollarization. The bond market was a major warning sign. Trump’s massive tax cuts will excite the stock market but the bond market will not like it. The tax cuts are going to blow up the debt between $9-$11 trillion in 10 years. Expect bond yields to go up.

The idea that the US goaded China to this is ludicrous. They were just saying they didn’t want China to retaliate. China has many bullets in its magazine on how to hurt the US. The big one is total rare earth ban which will stymie Trump’s reshoring production into the US. This trade war is far from over. Trump capitulated to the bond market.
 
Last edited:
Top