Too late, we already have a fallen poster saying he'll get on whichever side she wants, top, bottom, front, behind...
Ukrainian War Developments
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
Too late, we already have a fallen poster saying he'll get on whichever side she wants, top, bottom, front, behind...
They already do that lol, on paper at least.
It's not a good tittle to become the most experience in urban warfare.... urban warfare will always involve heavy casualty no matter how experience you are. I think armies need to train for but also avoid it at all cost.
To be honest if I'm in command, I'd rather commit war crime and thermobaric the whole lot than having my troops go door to door CQB
Hard to disagree here and to think otherwise would be oxymoronic. Going door to door in major urban city would be idiotic.
There's a reason why Imran Khan was in Moscow. There's a big game going on behind the scenes between China/Russia/India/Pakistan. How else do you explain these moves?
one thing I noticed from all this: climate change goals are essentially dead.
Fine. Russia wins by default then. Russia has the most freshwater in the world and the last unexploited oil/gas reserves. China loses a bit objectively due to the north drying out, but has the social structure to handle it - that's why there is 南水北调.
Meanwhile the Sahara weather patterns moves northward right into the middle of Europe. Mojave/Sonora Desert patterns move northward into coastal California. Imagine when Central Europe looks more like Syria... in all ways.
"The only reason West hasn't smacked Indians is because they need them for their Anti China crusade."
The 'anti-China crusade' is really driven--obsessively--by the USA, which is dragging other Western powers along with it.
Germany, for instance, would much prefer to have amicable relations with China, but it can hardly defy the USA.
Indeed, Germany preferred--at least when led by Angela Merkel--to have amicable relations with Russia.
Without the USA's compulsion to dominate China, other Western powers would be glad to get along with China.
I have observed no sign that the USA's willing to accept *the existence of China as an independent country* that has
become as powerful, let alone more powerful, than the USA. The USA perceives China's rise as an existential threat.
The USA already has chosen to go to war (politically and economically) against China in most ways except shooting yet.
I have heard some Americans say that the Communist Party of China is worse than the NSDAP (German Nazi Party)
and that China's 'genocide' of Tibetans and Uyghurs (which seems almost universally accepted as fact in the USA) is
morally worse than anything done by the Nazis, not to mention, of course, anything ever done by Japan to China.
Not many Americans today seem to have any awareness of or sympathy for Chinese suffering in the Sino-Japanese War.
If another Hitler were alive and ruling Germany today, I expect that the USA would seek to ally with him against China.
Indeed, if Russia were to offer to join NATO and allow the USA to establish military bases near China, then would not
the USA become willing to recognize Russia's sovereignty over Crimea and much of Ukraine?
American racism makes the Cold War against China (the 'Yellow Peril') cut even deeper than its Cold War against the USSR.
If a shooting war erupts between the USA and China, then US Sinophobia would be even worse than US Russophobia now.
I expect that the Chinese and Chinese Americans (US citizens) in the USA would be treated--at best--like Japanese and
Japanese Americans were treated in the USA during the Second World War. At worst, the Chinese in the USA might
be treated like the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during the First World War.
Former British colonial rule in Hong Kong is practically universally admired by Americans as a morally righteous model of
freedom, democracy, and prosperity. British institutional racism in Hong Kong is practically always denied or ignored.
I have met otherwise 'educated' Americans who believe that Hong Kong's Chinese always freely and overwhelmingly
voted to have a few white Britons rule over them with absolute power.
Many Americans of my acquaintance like to assume that everyone in China now exists in perpetual dread of being arbitrarily
imprisoned or executed at any time--as if China today must be like the USSR during the worst times of Stalin's purges.
These Americans assume that every Chinese is obsessed with the minute details of China's Communist Party. which dictates
exactly what every Chinese must do every day. (Wake up and receive detailed marching orders from the CCP every day!)
These Americans assume that every Chinese must be woefully ignorant or misinformed about the West because the CCP
has deprived every Chinese of access (VPNs cannot exist in China, right?) to any Western media sources.
Many Americans like to assume that all Chinese (completely 'brainwashed' and incapable of thinking for themselves)
must be the terrified subjects of a Communist tyranny, who yearn to be 'liberated' (even by being bombed) by the USA,
which also could help convert them to Christianity. In short, many Americans obstinately embrace woefully ignorant
and wildly irrational beliefs about China and the Chinese. That makes it harder for the USA to act rationally on China.
A white American friend (a nuclear physicist) told me that he believes that the Chinese are more intelligent on average
than white Americans in fields such as mathematics. But the Chinese have long shown that they are clearly inferior to
Westerners in the arts of government. So if the Chinese were smarter, then they would embrace American colonial rule.
The Chinese people would be much better off being ruled as a colony of the USA than as an independent country.
Indeed, I have met other Americans who believe that the ideal future relationship (though it's an unrealistic fantasy)
between the USA and China would be for Americans to rule all China as the British had ruled 'grateful' Hong Kong.
On account of US media self-censorship, few Americans are aware of the historical finding that the USA sought to
make a surprise attack (most likely a nuclear first strike) against China to prevent it from becoming a nuclear power.
Gordon H. Chang, a professor of history at Stanford University (who should not be confused with the notorious anti-China
pundit Gordon G. Chang), won the Louis Pelzer Award of the Organization of American Historians for his research
(in partially declassified US archives) on President John F. Kennedy's zeal to stop China from 'going nuclear'.
Gordon H. Chang wrote an article in 'The Journal of American History' about his findings and conclusions.
Around 1962, the CIA was reporting that China was capable of developing an atomic bomb within a few years
(contrary to popular racist beliefs that the Chinese were incapable of doing so other than by blindly copying).
JFK resolved to stop this at almost all costs. JFK asked the USSR to give the USA a free hand in attacking China.
The details of US planning (likely in its early stages) remain classified. But, given the avowed objective of eliminating
China's nuclear arms program (by destroying all related infrastructure and killing essential scientists and engineers),
the most likely plan would have been for the USA to launch one or more surprise nuclear strikes against China.
This would have been much more efficient and likely to succeed than the USA's conventional bombing of China.
The only reason why the USA did not proceed was the Khrushchev declined to reassure JFK that the USSR would
remain neutral if the USA made a surprise attack (most likely a nuclear first strike) against China.
Many Americans today may regret that the USA lost that opportunity to deal with its 'China problem'.
China should never overlook the reality that the USA regards China, not Russia, as its ultimate enemy.
An American Senator (if he knew Latin) someday may proclaim (like Cato the Censor): "(China) delenda est!"
This reality will change only if the USA recognizes that it lacks the power to destroy China and that the USA would
incur unbearable costs by striving to destroy China. But that recognition would require that most Americans make
the extremely bitter acceptance of the reality that they will be longer stronger than a 'racially inferior' people.
I suppose that I shall have to label my sarcasm.
Of course, I already knew that it's wildly unrealistic for a Uyghur insurgency to 'liberate' Xinjiang.
But that would not stop some Westerners who seem eager 'to fight to the last Uyghur' against China.
I wish that people, who seem likely incapable of playing 2D (standard) chess well, would stop writing '3D chess',
'4D chess', or '5D chess' (why not escalate?) as meaningless metaphors for something far removed from chess.
- Status