Ukrainian War Developments

Status
Not open for further replies.
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
zgx09t said:
I think you are going in reverse order, going from a sunny spot to an absolute horrible thunder storm, to prepare for an inevitability. You should start from where it would finally end up, and walk back to now to have a clear thinking and sort of a detail plan. That way there will not be any unplanned trigger point along the way that throws off your sunny day plan. China has to assume decoupling is already there and find the choke points and plug those in asap, and I believe that's what's happening now. Anything else over and above it is just a bonus, because confrontation is and will be forced upon China, no fault of China's own. Doesn't matter the fake weapons issue like now or bank transfers later, it will always be something of hot button issue that will challenge the leadership and throw the off the path if they don't already have the prepared mindset and a stormy day plan. When it is time to press the button, press the button.
Click to expand...

Do you think those chokepoints can be plugged immediately?
What if "ASAP" for certain chokepoints in terms of technology or financial systems takes years or even a decade?

Furthermore, how does that post counter what I said at all -- what I wrote was "For China, the longer with which it can delay an economic and technological decoupling and the longer with which it can build up its own domestic warchests (in terms of finances, resources, technologies), the better it will be" --- do you think this is true, or do you think it is untrue?
 
Maikeru

Maikeru

Captain
Registered Member
Stealthflanker said:
So i wonder why some "analysts" can come up with suggestions that Russians are running low on missiles based on choice of the weapons they use to do the job ?

I think to make such allegations, one have to look at least procurement rate of the equipment or to actually know the amount of inventory they actually have.
Click to expand...
It's possible that due to corruption and incompetence (and we have seen plenty of evidence of both) the Russians had rather less actual missiles in their inventory than they thought.
 
vincent

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
james smith esq said:
I find it fascinating how arguments evolve into folks taking positions on statements not made!

So, I’ll provide my own example.

It seems, to me, that this is a debate between:

1) those that believe that China, by absolute sovereign right, has the authority to make its own foreign-policy decisions, based upon its own internal decision-making structures, and to express these policies at its own discretion, and

2) those that believe that China has a limited form of sovereignty, and may be required by foreign, even hostile-foreign, power-structures, to agree to externally imposed foreign-policy decisions, and, further, be compelled, at the timing of such foreign powers, to make public-policy-statements acknowledging their agreement to such externally imposed imprimaturs.

If this is the case, then this debate may have revealed the true intentions of those, here, that, while they may claim to be Chinese patriots, in fact, are actually something other than.

So, now, how’s that for a straw-man construction?
Click to expand...
It is not really a matter of sovereignty. It is all about costs/benefits analysis. What are the benefits to China if China provide military support to Russia and what are the costs imposed by the West when that happens, and whether the benefits outweigh the costs.
 
Z

zgx09t

Junior Member
Registered Member
Bltizo said:
Do you think those chokepoints can be plugged immediately?
What if "ASAP" for certain chokepoints in terms of technology or financial systems takes years or even a decade?

Furthermore, how does that post counter what I said at all -- what I wrote was "For China, the longer with which it can delay an economic and technological decoupling and the longer with which it can build up its own domestic warchests (in terms of finances, resources, technologies), the better it will be" --- do you think this is true, or do you think it is untrue?
Click to expand...

It is the context that we differ on, a single snapshot on the ladder doesn't say if you are going up or down.
It is not risk free cost free situation for both sides, they too have an incentives to keep pushing and delaying the final showdown - case in point they haven't banned Russian oil yet - so you keeping on China's relative shortcomings at this current stage doesn't explain the whole picture, maybe more like a reflection of a sample bias. So who is more determined with a well prepared mindset in what he wants will get better shot at a chance to come out ahead, that's exactly where Russia as a strategic piece comes in, decoupling right now or not.
 
A

ArmchairAnalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
Dolcevita said:
Euro has reverting back to old ways post-Merkel. Is becoming too hostile to China and subservient servants to Anglo-supremacist. The facade of objectivity is off and this group cannot be trusted. Best to deal with the individually countries on a bilateral basis.
Click to expand...
That remains to be seen though.
EU has been lacking leadership for a very long time without a center to gather around.
With Brexit and the Germans seemingly shocked into accepting that leadership (and the rest letting them) by the invasion things might change to a much stronger Franco-Germanic world view long term. If the Germans are up to it that is. No doubt the French would be delighted to "assist" such a move.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top