@Nobaron bro such sensational news why telegraph your intent? I like to quote my brother @horse previous post " Just do it" if they are serious. They had no cards to play and they try to create one just to force the Chinese to the negotiating table, and they should be careful cause threat and bullying will not work as demonstrated by Yang Jiechi in Anchorage Alaska. And these kind of bullying and threats show how vulnerable and insecure the US and the West are. Its so obvious that most of their propaganda had backfire badly.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
2 words.
Strategic messaging.
I've said this before. They are trying to gauge how China will react.
So far China's reaction has been timid. US is trying to give the message that in a conflict between Taiwanese Island of China vs China, US will get involved . And China should not escalate it beyond regional conflict. Essentially it means US is going to drop bombs on Chinese territory, of course officially it means targeting PLA, unofficially it means whatever damage they can do without getting touched.
What china should make it clear is that, any conflict in Chinese territorial matter is china's matter. If US get involved in this, China will get involved with US mainland. Cities like NYC or DC may go though extensive "reforms" .
Sis
INDOPACOM estimate of 2025 Chinese forces in the Western Pacific:
Obviously the US considers this a problem which is why they're arguing over Pacific Deterrence Initiative. The politicians want to increase amount of forces forward deployed inside 1st island chain but Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation and Office of Net Assessment over in DoD argue that PLA forces are so overwhelming now that in event of conflict US troops forward deployed in 1st Island Chain and even within 2nd Island Chain would become target practice for the PLA. So they are actually calling for pulling back of forward deployed troops back to the west of the international date line, then in times of war the troops can move forward as needed.
I think the "then" part is laughable, but you can see the actual military experts who run sims and calculate stuff are rational. It's the politicians that don't want to back down.
I can understand the politican's point of view. If US pulls back to west of international date line then there's high probably of Japan and South Korea jumping ship which will shake the entire global hegemony. But if you don't pull back then what? Concentrate all US forces around the globe into the Western Pacific? Then everywhere else on the globe the hegemony would be at risk. It's a catch-22
Obviously the US considers this a problem which is why they're arguing over Pacific Deterrence Initiative. The politicians want to increase amount of forces forward deployed inside 1st island chain but Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation and Office of Net Assessment over in DoD argue that PLA forces are so overwhelming now that in event of conflict US troops forward deployed in 1st Island Chain and even within 2nd Island Chain would become target practice for the PLA. So they are actually calling for pulling back of forward deployed troops back to the west of the international date line, then in times of war the troops can move forward as needed.
I think the "then" part is laughable, but you can see the actual military experts who run sims and calculate stuff are rational. It's the politicians that don't want to back down.
I can understand the politican's point of view. If US pulls back to west of international date line then there's high probably of Japan and South Korea jumping ship which will shake the entire global hegemony. But if you don't pull back then what? Concentrate all US forces around the globe into the Western Pacific? Then everywhere else on the globe the hegemony would be at risk. It's a catch-22
@Nobaron Sis my apologies, China intent is well known, it was said countless time and the US knows it. It had become a broken record, what I'm seeing is that the Chinese don't trust the US and will negotiate only in a position of strength. Right now there are some weakness that needed to be plug but compare to the US we hold a stronger hand. This pandemic with the suffering and pain it produce is a godsend to China, it had given us at least 5 years of development time compare to the US and it highlighted the importance of China to the rest of world. so within 5 years a certain parity will be met and therefore the US will have to accept China as co equal and a reset will occur that will satisfy both parties.2 words.
Strategic messaging.
I've said this before. They are trying to gauge how China will react.
So far China's reaction has been timid. US is trying to give the message that in a conflict between Taiwanese Island of China vs China, US will get involved . And China should not escalate it beyond regional conflict. Essentially it means US is going to drop bombs on Chinese territory, of course officially it means targeting PLA, unofficially it means whatever damage they can do without getting touched.
What china should make it clear is that, any conflict in Chinese territorial matter is china's matter. If US get involved in this, China will get involved with US mainland. Cities like NYC or DC may go though extensive "reforms" .
Sis
War for me especially a Taiwan invasion will not happen cause why destroy something that you owned? My scenario is a naval blockade that will force the American navy out in the second island chain to be destroyed by PLA rocket and submarine forces. That is the focus of PLA modernization drive to inflict heavy casualties to the US and Allies forces. An Escalatory Dominance.
antiterror13
Brigadier
Funny, which nation is in hysteria and shouting Chyna everyday ?
Im along the same tune as you in that the US political establishment, as a whole, is at a complete loss of what policies to adopt in face of China's rise in comprehensive strength.
China needs the cooperation of Indonesia to expel the British from Australia. They can use Indonesia as a base of liberation of Australia.
I agree with that idea, as I have suspected before. They were throwing everything at China, but nothing was particularly effective. It really has arrived at a point were they just try to throw enough mud and see what sticks, seems to me a classic American expression. That also shows that there is no coherent plan. That is part ONE.
Part TWO is even more sneaky, because part two is not directed at China. In its wisdom, the Americans believe there is a willing coalition against China, and all they have to do is provide leadership. That is plain silly.
For those of us who live in a British Parliamentary system, when was the last time a back bench rebellion was successful? I cannot remember one. Yet, that was how Boris made his U-turn on Huawei. So there is a good chance there is another U-turn down the road.
The is the sneaky part of part two. The Americans are going around making threats and picking small fights with their allies to see who is with them or against them.
All of this seems to relate back to China, China, Chyna, and that there is no strategy as they are in the process of making one up.
The CCP will look upon this as weakness, which I would assume they would, and I would agree with that assessment.
Colition of the willing, Partners of Choice, etc its all just terminology, in truth it boils down to US sanction power backed by threat of military force and/or CIA coup...
But its been effective so far, and US will milk it to the last drop and then some...