I'm not even sure the Americans will give loans to Taiwan. Once armed unification starts, the cpc will ensure it finishes with absolute control over Taiwan. There won't be a roc government to pay back loans. The cpc won't recognize any debt the roc takes on. In fact will probably nationalize an business that is consider owned by hostile forces.China's economy today is big enough there is only 1 thing and only 1 thing that can potentially stop China and that is WW3.
No amount of:
1. economic sanctions
2. political isolation
3. mass propaganda
from "the West" can stop China.
BTW I do not think the Taiwan issue, much like the war in Ukraine, is big enough to start WW3. Sure the Americans will cry, complain, provide weapons, and Loan money with interest. I feel bad for the Ukrainians, they'll be making debt payments to the USA for the next 3 generations. For example look at the British. It took them 61 years to pay off their WW2 loans to the USA. American aid is Not free money.
Do we have thread or info that discuss the jointness between different branches of PLA? I frequently read critique about jointness between different branches in PLA. Some even claimed that inter service rivalry is too strong.
Thanks, btw do you have a link to the complete transcript?Transcript from Patch's podcast a little bit back:
Justin Bronk was saying the Chinese have a lot of issues coordinating their assets. With like airspace deconfliction being the big name, between their ground-based air defense and their actual aerial assets. This is just straight up not true. Like its just abjectly not true. Before 2016, it was. And really like a lot of what you'll see in the think tank world, it was true for a long time, but after the mid 2010s its just not the case anymore. After they did their whole big pivot and transition to joint warfare; after they, kind of, cemented theatre commands as the fundamental operational control, like organization. They operate in a joint fashion with basically everything they do. They don't really consider this whole... oh this is the ground based air defense, this is the air people, they're separate! That's not really that works. To them its all one campaign. Its, hey this is controlling this section of airspace. Every person that is ever going to be involved in any of that is going to that command center. And they're going to be communicating with one another. And they're going to be planning and using their tools together. And so its pretty much the same way that we do it. When we issue airspace control orders, we don't just not tell the army or something like that. Everyone knows about it. The Joint Forces Air Component Commander, for example, they'll be disseminating those sorts of things and they'll be including army and ground-based air defenses from Patriot batteries for example. They'll be including naval fires for that sort of thing. So its just not really how they function anymore. And this is something that Bronk does a lot, where he'll take issues that are faced by the Russian army and project them on the PLA. I think it's highly erroneous and I'm not a big fan of Bronk for that alone actually. But yea no, he does it and the reason why is because in Russia's case they really do have that problem. They never really developed the kind of Joint Warfare concepts that the PLA and US have at the moment and so for them it is really a lot more service-delineated. So you know, army guys might genuinely not hear about airforce guys until you know they're calling them in or whatever. There might not be a lot of deconfliction between ground-based air defenses and actual strike warfare assets in the air. Its hard to do and you have to have an organization set up to do it. And really right now, its pretty much only NATO and the PLA and... yea that's honestly about it as far as that can do it. But the PLA have gotten to, in the past 2 years, they can do it just fine.
Didn't know you manually transcript that part.No, I did the transcript above and I'm not doing it for the whole 3hr podcast. Just did this one because it was a relatively short section.
Could you please transcript what Patch & Co. said about India please? I hear it was some slander, I really wanna know exactly what they discussed. ThanksNo, I did the transcript above and I'm not doing it for the whole 3hr podcast. Just did this one because it was a relatively short section.
Could you please transcript what Patch & Co. said about India please? I hear it was some slander, I really wanna know exactly what they discussed. Thanks
Man if the content is this severe I'm surprised that it didn't provoke anger from IT cells.Blitzo: *reading a question* Predictions on the Sino-Indian border - I don't really follow that stuff.
Patch: I SO badly want to see a Sino-Indian war. Oh my fucking god, you don't even understand.
Blitzo: Okay, tell us why Patch. Tell us why - I mean I know why but you-
Patch: Well you said no racism on stream. Well I guess its not really racist. I just dislike everyone equally so, whatever. I think it would be really funny to watch Indians just get fucking dunked on. Because they talk all sorts of shit, and I've actually done a bit of work with the Indian military and I can tell you - I'm not going to make a poop joke because its India and Rick (Blitzo) would get mad at me. But they talk a lot of the same things they are, so.
[some other questions/answers later]
Blitzo: Oo, abc asks thoughts on thoughts on AMCA and TEBDF which is the advanced Indian 5th gen fighter and the Indian naval carrier-based 4.5 gen fighter that they were-
Patch: I think its fucking adorable. I want to see it. I want to laugh at it. I want to look at it.
Blitzo: So my view is that - I've be honest - the Indian military is actually the military that I follow probably the 2nd or 3rd most after the PLA. And I had a genuine interest in the Indian military just because - when I started PLA and mil-watching in general back in the mid 2000s, the Indian military and PLA were at almost, they were similar in someways and different in others, and it was interesting to see how both sides were going about their procurement and development. And we can see now what nearly 20 years; 15 years later how things have progressed and perhaps diverged. Its interesting - Indian procurement is very interesting to me, fascinating almost. So I'll-
Patch: Its a whole other subject.
Blitzo: Yea, its a whole other subject. I'll just say wait and see. A few questions - let's see a few other questions-
Toaster: The Indians have really struggled to make even basic equipment like their INSAS rifle, they're being replaced by-
Patch: You could really have stopped at the Indians just struggle.
Toaster: *laughs* Yea like, the INSAS rifle right, which is like the rifle's the most basic tool of modern warfighting and they're going to basically replace it with an AK-derivative because apparently its just not very good and jams a lot.
Patch: *Indian accent* We are superpowa 2020.
Toaster: Its really fragile. We actually know that the Chinese QBZ rifle is actually semi-decent because you can't import Chinese guns to the USA, but you can import them to Canada. And as far as I know, variants of the bullpup are imported to Canada, they do fine. They're essentially used as an (AR?) stand-ins.
Patch: Yea, pretty much. When it comes to rifles nowadays and carbines and all that shit - there's not a lot of difference. It doesn't matter all that much at the end of the day. Light infantry, I've told the guys this a bunch of times, but I guess I'll tell everyone; infantry doesn't do the killing in modern wars, they do the dying. They die a lot as a matter of fact. So, at the end of the day, as long as they're able to put out suppressing fire and send whatever maneuver element may be able to maneuver on and destroy that position - you're fine dude. You're good to go.