Military Thread: Humanity Hanging from a Cross of Iron

[ComradeYellow]

How Could the U.S. Navy Take On China's 500-Ship Navy? | The National Interest

Worry not, Westerlings, China doesn't want a naval fleet designed for world domination (Except, perhaps, to protect their lucrative trade routes), they just need a navy that is capable of whipping anything that comes at them in the South China Sea.

This fear mongering of Chinese domination on military sites is becoming so sad it's almost laughable.  For centuries, China has had the worlds largest economy*, and yet they've never once attempted to enslave, subjugate, or colonize anybody, unlike some we know.

*For kicks, I randomly looked up the year 1500 and who had the largest economy at that time, and the result was....China!

[Guard Dog]

So Russia is just not doing it for you these days? Got a new beau?

 I kid of course 

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, ComradeYellow said:

and yet they've never once attempted to enslave, subjugate, or colonize anybody, unlike some we know.

Yeah, makes you wonder which country it was then, that invaded and occupied Tibet, forcing the government into exile.

And then there were those naval vessels escorting Chinese, industrial grade fishing vessels into other countries territorial water so they can "strip mine" their traditional fishing grounds and chase away the locals. Seriously mate, enough with the lies and the CCP propaganda already.

 

Edit: I'm sure the four existing military bases on Antarctica is only for "research" purposes... and the airport being expanded on Manus island to be capable of handling Chinese airforce planes or the naval base being built north of Darwin is definitely not there to enact a military blockade of Australia, oh no

[Gromnir]

9 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Yeah, makes you wonder which country it was then, that invaded and occupied Tibet, forcing the government into exile.

And then there were those naval vessels escorting Chinese, industrial grade fishing vessels into other countries territorial water so they can "strip mine" their traditional fishing grounds and chase away the locals. Seriously mate, enough with the lies and the CCP propaganda already.

largest economy is also utter bs. imagine a family o' four living on $100k a year in 2021 milwaukee-- hardly sooper rich by american standards. now imagine a family o' forty living on same $100k.

the reason why china eventual adopted their draconian and self destructive one-child policy is 'cause o' the widespread famine. as large as is the chinese population, near all o' that population lived along two river valleys. chinese bureaucracy were indeed a marvel, but it had stretched the limits o' an agrarian society past sustainable limits.

ask for per capita gdp o' chinese in the 1500s. have no idea what the numbers would be, but would be shocked if it resulted in top or best or most wealthy. china were dirt poor and were struggling yearly to stave off mass starvation event. pretend like they were some kinda enlightened exemplar o' peaceful restraint is worst kinda dark humor or just simple ignorance.

HA! Good Fun!

[Gorth]

As for why China invaded Tibet in 1950... the main reason I can think of is, the two rivers (and their river valleys) @Gromnirrefers to both originates in Tibet and so makes it a strategically important area. Yes, sometimes water is more important than oil or rare earths or anything else you can dig up from the ground. Wars have been fought for less reasons than controlling rivers and water sources.

 

On a related note, it's going to be interesting to watch how this dam blocking one of the sources of the Nile is going to pan out. Will Egypt go to war over it.

 

On a related note to the related note, looks like the Tigrayan people have had some success in kicking the Ethiopian army's butt and the leaders of the federal government are now calling for civilians to volunteer to fight for them... well, good luck with that. If you don't have a real national identity, it's hard to use nationalism as a tool to get gullible people to fight your wars on your behalf to stay in power.

Edit: Because I haven't posted much in the way of links in the last few posts https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-58163641

Edit2: link for the above, alliances being formed and lines drawn in the sand? https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/7/7/saudi-supporting-egypt-sudan-water-rights-amid-gerd-dispute

[Zoraptor]

Eh, Ethiopia has a very strong sense of national identity. One of the few African countries that does. It just doesn't stop the different ethnics from fighting each other. That's especially true when the rebels are getting a lot of help from outsiders hoping they'll blow up the Grand Renaissance Dam.

China had the largest economy nearly continuously from the 15th to the late 19th century, that's a fact. Largest GDP/c... probably not, but it would have been up there, and for the time period it's a... limited way to measure things*. Many of the apparent challengers actually had ludicrously small Gross DOMESTIC Products because they were colonial powers whose money was made overseas, indeed the lack of Gross DOMESTIC Product was precisely what sent Spain bankrupt a dozen times despite having massive amounts of New World gold flowing into the country.

*Consider the British Empire. Exploited its colonies, starved 100 million Indians, and- if you include all its colonials- its GDP/c was pretty low. Wouldn't call the BE poor by any measure except that though. Or the Roman Empire. The economic conditions of the vast majority there were pretty awful, and it ran on literal literal slave labour. It was also incredibly rich in absolute terms.

Edited August 12, 2021 by Zoraptor

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, Gorth said:

As for why China invaded Tibet in 1950... the main reason I can think of is, the two rivers (and their river valleys) @Gromnirrefers to both originates in Tibet and so makes it a strategically important area. Yes, sometimes water is more important than oil or rare earths or anything else you can dig up from the ground. Wars have been fought for less reasons than controlling rivers and water sources.

 

 

what china achieved in spite o' its poverty is kinda amazing, but geography were the pivotal factor. a european population a fraction o' the size o' china, constant on the edge o' starvation, would be intractable and difficult to control, especially as the native european populations had developed independent. two valleys east or west in what is now germany or france mighta had a culture evolve with its own unique traditions and languages and even when those peoples eventual began to mix, they retained their tribal identities for many centuries. 

china were different. two river valleys representing the near entirety o' the population, and in spite o' extremes o' poverty and starvation which woulda' driven people elsewheres to revolt (instability such as were the norm in european colonies) china had incredible cohesion over an inspiring span o' centuries. homogenous culture and a population limited to only two main waterways allowed for a bureaucracy to develop in ways not possible o' replication anywhere else on the planet save egypt which you already mentioned. unlike the tigris and euphrates, the nile flooded regularly and the flooding were instrumental in reinvigorating the rich soil which the egyptians farmed. explains why egypt enjoyed similar longevity, eh? 

'course in spite o' homogenous populations and a concentrated population, poverty and starvation is ordinary disruptive to smooth running o' a government.  eventual a bureaucracy will find it impossible to control a starving population... even with the benefit o' a state religion which convinces the population that suffering is natural and even godly... or somesuch. which is why chinese police power and force resources were constant directed inwards. colonization is unlikely if all efforts is focused on preventing internal strife and discord. current chinese authoritarianism and brutality is not shocking when one considers history. but again, is curious that success were exact what led to so much chinese suffering. 'cause o' the unique rivers, chinese homogenous populations grew beyond that which were achieved anywhere else. once populations grew too large to be sustainable by conventional farming, the bureaucracy were able to impose nationwide laws regarding cultivation which allowed the population to grow even further. success! 'course the success only magnified the future problem o' impossibility o' sustainability. in spite o' advantages o' geography leading to homogenous populations, china still required police power directed internal to maintain control as the chinese population suffered at levels which would (and did) drive european populations to rebellion.

in a land o' plenty, the chinese eventual produced arakis like scarcity. weren't lack o' water which led to suffering. were the excess o' people which were the problem, and the excess had only been possible 'cause o' unique circumstances o' geography and culture. is easy to dismiss chinese authoritarianism and brutality as inhumane, but for much o' chinese history, the bureaucracy were trying to stave off mass starvation (and enrich themselves while developing a tradition o' improbable cronyism, but prevent famines were also a major motivation). genuine fascinating if a bit horrifying as well.

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 12, 2021 by Gromnir

[ComradeYellow]

9 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

So Russia is just not doing it for you these days? Got a new beau?

 I kid of course 

You speak like a dark web Gen-X er, always pointing the blame to Easterners for your woes, when in fact it was the U.S.A. who allied with these people against the fascist pukes from Germany, Italy, and Japan.

It seems only educated youngsters actually have a solid grasp on U.S. history, whilst older people seem to only think in Cold War terminology.  Whelp I guess they don't call it the cyclical nature of history for nothing.

9 hours ago, Gorth said:

. Seriously mate, enough with the lies and the CCP propaganda already.

Yeah sorry I'm immune to white supremacist Cold War lies and propaganda, as were many other youngsters in 1861 and 1941 when the banners were called to dispel such nonsense and set the record straight.

and lol @Azdeus for always being the diligent sinophobic Swede who sees "Asiatic hordes" as the the ultimate menace.  Rings a bell.

[Guard Dog]

2 hours ago, ComradeYellow said:

You speak like a dark web Gen-X er, always pointing the blame to Easterners for your woes, when in fact it was the U.S.A. who allied with these people against the fascist pukes from Germany, Italy, and Japan.

It seems only educated youngsters actually have a solid grasp on U.S. history, whilst older people seem to only think in Cold War terminology.  Whelp I guess they don't call it the cyclical nature of history for nothing.

 

 

[HoonDing]

Tibet is as Chinese as Danzig ist Deutsch

[kanisatha]

16 hours ago, Gorth said:

Yeah, makes you wonder which country it was then, that invaded and occupied Tibet, forcing the government into exile.

Not only the Tibetans but also the Mongols, Uighurs, and Koreans have historically suffered Chinese oppression. And even today China seeks to take land from India, Bhutan, Burma, and all the countries around the South China Sea.

Also, the tribute system *was* colonialism. And in that vein the so-called "belt and road initiative", which is China's contemporary tribute system, is 21st century colonialism.

[Malcador]

Seems like it's the way the game is played.

[Zoraptor]

6 hours ago, kanisatha said:

Not only the Tibetans but also the Mongols, Uighurs, and Koreans have historically suffered Chinese oppression. And even today China seeks to take land from India, Bhutan, Burma, and all the countries around the South China Sea.

Koreans, Tibetans (and Vietnamese for that matter) sure, but the mongols and turkics gave at least as good as they got, historically. Three out of five of the last dynasties of the 'Chinese' Empire were turkic or mongol, and the mongol invasion killed more people than WW1 (maybe WW2 or the Taiping/ Heavenly Kingdom rebellion too) at a time when the world's population was much lower.

Not going to get any argument from me over them trying their luck with their neighbours now though, only observation I'd make is how monumentally stupid and counterproductive antagonising all your neighbours simultaneously is and how antagonising India specifically lead to far more damage than the possible benefit gained. Same with the wolf warrior diplomacy, plays well at home and seems effective there where the rhetorical playing field is so very slanted as you can just throw anyone disagreeing in jail, and it makes you feel strong. But it makes everyone else think you're a bit of a knob, at best.

Quote

And in that vein the so-called "belt and road initiative", which is China's contemporary tribute system, is 21st century colonialism.

I thought you weren't going to talk modern politics?

(If it is then so is the WB/ IMF. At least the B&R stuff goes into actual concrete projects; for most of their existence the IMF/ WB gave money to despots that they 100% knew would be simply stolen, to create a debt trap and prop up western friendly regimes via arms purchases etc)

[kanisatha]

18 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

I thought you weren't going to talk modern politics?

(If it is then so is the WB/ IMF. At least the B&R stuff goes into actual concrete projects; for most of their existence the IMF/ WB gave money to despots that they 100% knew would be simply stolen, to create a debt trap and prop up western friendly regimes via arms purchases etc)

I avoid US domestic politics discussions. But world politics is fair game given that it's my profession as an international relations academic.

And you won't get any defense of the liberal international order from me. I'm a staunch realist and am happy to see the LIO dying right now and love watching all my fellow liberal (in the political science sense of that word) academics wringing their hands in agitation. But, the faults of the IMF and WB were more incompetence and stupidity. The BRI is malicious by design and intent. My country of origin from a long time ago is Sri Lanka. What China has done there, and specifically the Hambantota port deal, which has now become a classic case study in many international relations classes and textbooks, is a worse form of colonialism than anything the British did. To use China's own silly rhetoric, it is colonialism with a happy face, which is a far more insidious form of colonialism than the brute force colonialism of the old Europeans.

[Zoraptor]

There's certainly plenty to dislike about B&R. I'd cite the general insistence on using Chinese labour instead of training locals and the dubious necessity of some projects to a list too. But, there shouldn't be an expectation of altruism from them, and you do get the infrastructure built even if it is a white elephant highway like Montenegro, the other classic example often cited.

I put it in the same category as someone using credit card debt, it's fine if it's really necessary, but there's a responsibility on both the lender and borrower to be responsible in how they do it. Too many countries buying the equivalent of a big screen TV on credit then being surprised when the interest free period runs out and they have to start paying for it.

 

[Gorth]

They (China) did attempt to get a foothold in Australia previously with the B&R tool (as well as attempts at massive farmland and industry buyouts) Luckily they eventually got sent packing and with a “don’t slam the door on the way out”

[Zoraptor]

About every six months some politician here talks about how very interested our government is in B&R, nothing ever seems to progress beyond that though. There has been some push back against Chinese 'investors' not living up to the claims they've made in their Overseas Investment Commission applications recently though, with some divestments ordered. Not that that says much, if they bought a property for a million dollars last year even if forced to sell they'd make 300k average profit (albeit, subject to tax).

[Gfted1]

The Last Oliver Hazard Perry Class Frigate Ever Built Just Got Pummeled To Death.

[kanisatha]

20 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

The Last Oliver Hazard Perry Class Frigate Ever Built Just Got Pummeled To Death.

Ah, the Perries. Workhorse of the late Cold War. Got used a lot in the miniatures wargames my friends and I used to play back in the '80s when I was in college.

[Gfted1]

Back when I was on a Westpac deployment, and while we were just floating around, they put on a firepower demonstration for the crew. As I understand it this is a fairly rare event and we all went to the flight deck to watch. They slowly ramped up by firing off the CIWS a few times and had an F-14 fire a Sidewinder at a flare. Then other ships in the battle group would pass aport and fire the 5" guns and machinegun fire (no missiles unfortunately). The grand finale was BB-62 (or was it BB-63?) firing the 16" guns in a broadside...it was awe inspiring. 

[kanisatha]

On 8/19/2021 at 11:44 AM, Gfted1 said:

Back when I was on a Westpac deployment, and while we were just floating around, they put on a firepower demonstration for the crew. As I understand it this is a fairly rare event and we all went to the flight deck to watch. They slowly ramped up by firing off the CIWS a few times and had an F-14 fire a Sidewinder at a flare. Then other ships in the battle group would pass aport and fire the 5" guns and machinegun fire (no missiles unfortunately). The grand finale was BB-62 (or was it BB-63?) firing the 16" guns in a broadside...it was awe inspiring. 

Which boats did you deploy with? Must've been Forrestal or Kitty Hawk classes.

[Gfted1]

I was on CVN-65 and 72. 

[kanisatha]

On 8/20/2021 at 1:59 PM, Gfted1 said:

I was on CVN-65 and 72. 

Nice! Then it was more recent. The Big E. She's still in my rotation of desktop wallpapers.

[Gfted1]

The US military may soon declassify a secret space weapon.

[kanisatha]

2 hours ago, Gfted1 said:

The US military may soon declassify a secret space weapon.

I saw this too. But the article doesn't give any information, even speculative, about what it may be ('cause I'm dying to know!).