@Richard Santos Bro, sorry I disagree, we're talking about the Russian here, they have the tech, the industrial capability and logistic to sustain a prolong conflict. You just have to study their history of resiliency, the initial Wehrmacht campaign in 1941, the Russian suffered huge losses and yet by 1944 within 2years and a half they were at the gates of Berlin. The current war is at its initial phase and the Russian are doing a different strategy worth watching (Beijing is surely watching intensively) and adapting, maybe it will become a norm in modern warfare as we enter a multipolar world.What China needs is not technology. technology takes too long to translate into military capability. If China were to supply large scale military aid to Russia, sino american relationship can collapse totally very quickly, in matter of weeks or month. military technology can not translate into countervailing military capability for many years, even decade or more. The only thing that would be worth China ripping up all possibility of modus vivandi with the US is if Russia makes a binding commitment to immediately extend her nuclear umbrella over china while china builds up her own strategic deterrence.
Given how keen Russia seems to be to start a nuclear war with NATO right now, no thanks to the nuclear umbrella idea.What China needs is not technology. technology takes too long to translate into military capability. If China were to supply large scale military aid to Russia, sino american relationship can collapse totally very quickly, in matter of weeks or month. military technology can not translate into countervailing military capability for many years, even decade or more. The only thing that would be worth China ripping up all possibility of modus vivandi with the US is if Russia makes a binding commitment to immediately extend her nuclear umbrella over china while china builds up her own strategic deterrence.
Er, yeah. Not forgetting the totally VAST quantities of stuff supplied to them by UK and (especially) USA. UK invaded Iran so it could supply USSR. Japan, much to the chagrin of its supposed allies, failed to interdict convoys from USA to Vladivostok. Almost the entire production of P39s went to USSR. You can certainly say that USSR supplied the blood needed to defeat Hitler, but UK and USA supplied a lot of the means.@Richard Santos Bro, sorry I disagree, we're talking about the Russian here, they have the tech, the industrial capability and logistic to sustain a prolong conflict. You just have to study their history of resiliency, the initial Wehrmacht campaign in 1941, the Russian suffered huge losses and yet by 1944 within 2years and a half they were at the gates of Berlin. The current war is at its initial phase and the Russian are doing a different strategy worth watching (Beijing is surely watching intensively) and adapting, maybe it will become a norm in modern warfare as we enter a multipolar world.
There is a very strong possibility that if China were to lend large scale military assistance to Russia, the United States will retaliate by formally recognizing the independence of Taiwan shortly after the conflict in Ukraine reach some kind of hiatus. In such a case or China will be in the very difficult position of choosing to fight or not. Giving up any major military asset such as fourth generation fighters to russia, Especially when it is not altogether clear such support could have any decisive affect on the outcome, will not be seen as a particularly slick move
Careful with the blanket statement. I know a hispanic ex-NYPD who did 4 tours of Iraq/Afghanistan because the money was too good. Does not mean he will go to Ukraine unless the war sponsor raise their offer.Definitely not police from the US. Police, here, are concerned with only one thing, i. e., getting home alive after their shifts, no matter how many innocent lives they destroy during their shifts. Volunteering to go into guaranteed danger ain’t their m. o.!