Discussing Biden's Potential China Policy

bettydice said:

"Question: What was the rationale of then Imperial Japan for invading China?" Simply speaking, China's economic size didn't defend China from Japanese invasion. The US was militarily blockading Japan. China has no such ability to blockade any country. Having the biggest economy or being no.1 in GDP doesn't do anything. Enemies don't somehow stop their attacks just because you have bigger economy than them. China didn't obey the US when China was poor and the US was overwhelmingly the biggest economy. You shouldn't expect things would be any different when the economic sizes are reversed.

"by then how many Nuclear Subs do you think China would have?" It doesn't matter what or how many China would have. What China has does not offset enemy's offensive power. Modern weaponry is destructive enough even for smaller military and China has so many enemies all around. Think about this, no matter how many guns and bullets you have, it doesn't block a single enemy bullet.

You don't need much economy to have capabilities to destroy China. Even the poorest and most impoverished small countries have missiles and nuclear weapons, even the poorest tribes are running tanks and shooting rockets and Australia isn't and will never be the that much poor in the first place.

Economy is not a "the biggest takes all" game. The US or no one needs the biggest economy to have military capabilities to counter China. The US+Canada+Australia are two whole continents. They will of course always have enough economic means no matter what. Economy isn't an issue here. Taiwan already has/is adding significant missiles to strike on mainland China and they don't just go away even if Taiwan's economy reduces to pineapple farms. Taiwan doesn't even need pineapples to have nuclear missiles.

Click to expand...

So much wrong here
China was not even industrialized during ww2 while the US was by far the most industrialized nation and had the largest gdp in the world at that time. So of course the US could blockade Japan and eventually win the war. China could definitely blockade some countries if it went all out like the US did in a 1vs1 scenario.

Lol You think nuclear submarines are indestructible that can’t not be tracked and sunk by enemy subs, ships and aircraft? Modern weapons are destructive because of guns and bullets? By the way armor can block bullets.

So NK can destroy the US? Are you implying Australia is getting nuclear weapons?

In an arms race the economy is the backbone. Numbers and technology matters. Missiles can be intercepted and launch platforms destroyed. China has stated it would invade if Taiwan was acquiring nukes.

horse said:

I just explained how China will circumvent all these US strategies you brought up.

So far, it has been going good.

---------------------------------------

What is the "Center of Gravity?"

That is where the power comes from.

What is the US alliance system? Is that a "Center of Gravity?"

How do you break this alliance, which the Americans consider strength.

Simplest way is to go after or turn the weakest parts of the alliance.

Can we see why the Chinese interest in maintaining good relations with South Korea.

Let's face the facts. There is a new AUKUS, but South Korea was never a part of that discussion.

Click to expand...

Are you sure the US alliance system is a "Center of Gravity" for the US?

From my vantage point, it isn't. From my vantage point, its the military-industrial complex. That's the one thing they've never sacrificed anything for - every budget, they've protected it. They've let their "allies" get screwed over before, but and again now. In fact screwing over allies is practically a bi-partisan pass-time, both Trump's regime and Biden's regime have done so and so have previous presidents. But the MIC never gets touched by either party.

Another core foundation of US power is the world banking system. The all-mighty US Dollar, and the fact that basically everyone's money needs to go through US-controlled entities.

The US alliance system is just a formal way of extending the influence of the MIC and the banking system around the world without resistance, but the US doesn't need alliances to force the MIC and the USD onto someone, not anymore. Not since the end of the first Cold War - their sheer dominance in the world today ensures everyone needs to use them. The MIC is also incredibly integrated with every-day the everyday civilian industry - Honeywell is a major US defense company but they also make thermostats. Boeing - 'nuff said. They money they make also goes to the same entity, whether its from the military or the civilian side.

While I think China is trying to decrease the power of these two pillars - doing less business in USD, coming up with the C919, C929.

But that's what the AUKUS pushes back on. The nuclear subs? No-one sane thinks Australia can do anything with them. No-one sane thinks Australia can afford them. Also, delivery in 20-25 years? Useless - unless you see it as the US MIC having a guaranteed income stream for 20-25 years. At the expense of regular Australians, yes, but Australians are just allies - really, vassals, of the Americans, and therefore, to the Biden regime, expendable.

Also, this deal just ensured the resources of the 6th-largest country in the world can be bought ONLY with USD. To boot, it was resources that China was previously buying lots of. In another Universe, maybe Australia goes neutral in another 20 years and starts accepting RMB for them. After all, there's a lot of Chinese in Australia, and a lot of Chinese tourists. Australia can buy from China, their largest trading partner. What's the big deal, just cutting out the middleman. This will never happen now. In our universe, maybe China will buy less of resources from Australia. Maybe Australia has to sell their resources for cheap, and in significantly less amounts. This hurts every-day Australians, but does the US care? No, the MIC and the USD has been protected.

Also, Australia has a population of 30 million and they're sitting on the 6th-largest country in the World. That's now all America's. That's not an insignificant economic potential. That's not an insignificant economy full stop, AUS has a $1.4 trillion USD GDP. Iran has 454Billion... I don't see This isn't an insignificant or symbolic gesture. This is a major move in the US protecting two of the core pillars of the American Empire. Two pillars that China's been attacking.

The question is if France's reaction will do anything, I think. Will they switch to decrease USD? Will they move to hurt the US MIC? If they don't, I don't see any value in what they're doing. MIC and USD is core, everything else is window dressing.

Just my thoughts. Sorry if its long.

USD is core, The Core, all the Imperial Power comes from the USD

MIC is an inertial machine greased with dollars; but it is not the core of the heart of the matter

Fedupwithlies said:

Are you sure the US alliance system is a "Center of Gravity" for the US?
.
.
Just my thoughts. Sorry if its long.

Click to expand...

That's what we are here talking about!

The US alliance system has over 800 military bases around the world. If China goes to war against America, those bases in East Asia will be attacked in a total war scenario.

Wipe out those bases, and China can win the war.

That is the "Center of Gravity," where the power comes from. That was what Clausewitz saw on the battlefield.

China can win the war too if they wipe out the entire American military industrial complex. However, it is probably easier to work on the allies where the bases are.

That is what the Americans did to North Vietnam, they bombed everything related to industry and armaments. That is what they did to Serbia. Attack those centers of gravity. You are correct in your post.

In China's case, the task could be easier. Instead of an attack US bases in allied countries, China should try to turn those countries.

If the country turns, and does not allow US bases to launch attacks or eliminates them, then China wiped out those US bases, without firing a shot. Let's ask Rodrigo Duterte what he thinks eh? Thailand used to allow Americans to bomb Vietnam from their airbases. Times change.

That is the beauty of China's strategy. They will try to turn you economically, and if necessary, they will wipe you out militarily those US bases in Asia. That is why the Chinese are not easy to deal with.

That was why the RCEP was important. When it was proposed by China that the region be more integrated economically, ASEAN took that to mean that China wanted to be friends. So far so good.

There is no country in ASEAN that is gung-ho in supporting America in a China war. There is no interest. Those US bases have been wiped out.

Fedupwithlies said:

The question is if France's reaction will do anything, I think.

Click to expand...

The roping in of UK and AUS into a hostile alliance is a financial setback but not without cost for them. As late as 2013, UK was set to become a major center of RMB internationalization with Even in 2018, So in this regard, you are correct. It actually is all about the USD. Australia and UK gaining financial independence and moving towards the RMB was considered an escalation. In fact I would not be surprised if Trump was just a public face for something that had been brewing for a long time but needed to wait for an election cycle to be put in force in a presentable way.

Let's talk France and Euros. France is a core Eurozone member and already has a currency swap agreement with China. A large portion of bilateral trade is in EUR and RMB: then rising to . But France isn't the only one - Germany has 46% of companies issuing RMB invoices. In fact, even in 2019, UK clearing of RMB is still growing.



So what does AUKUS do financially? It commits UK and AUS to move away from RMB financially as you said. However, what it also does is that it cuts them off from EUR too. This move, along with Brexit, seems to sever the alliance system into a less emphasized "European" side and a highly emphasized "Anglo-Pacific" side. That is to say, they are no longer contesting EUR-RMB ties.

horse said:

That's what we are here talking about!

The US alliance system has over 800 military bases around the world. If China goes to war against America, those bases in East Asia will be attacked in a total war scenario.

Wipe out those bases, and China can win the war.

That is the "Center of Gravity," where the power comes from. That was what Clausewitz saw on the battlefield.

China can win the war too if they wipe out the entire American military industrial complex. However, it is probably easier to work on the allies where the bases are.

That is what the Americans did to North Vietnam, they bombed everything related to industry and armaments. That is what they did to Serbia. Attack those centers of gravity. You are correct in your post.

In China's case, the task could be easier. Instead of an attack US bases in allied countries, China should try to turn those countries.

If the country turns, and does not allow US bases to launch attacks or eliminates them, then China wiped out those US bases, without firing a shot. Let's ask Rodrigo Duterte what he thinks eh? Thailand used to allow Americans to bomb Vietnam from their airbases. Times change.

That is the beauty of China's strategy. They will try to turn you economically, and if necessary, they will wipe you out militarily those US bases in Asia. That is why the Chinese are not easy to deal with.

That was why the RCEP was important. When it was proposed by China that the region be more integrated economically, ASEAN took that to mean that China wanted to be friends. So far so good.

There is no country in ASEAN that is gung-ho in supporting America in a China war. There is no interest. Those US bases have been wiped out.

Click to expand...

Ok, but I'm not convinced the US will back down if they lose their bases in Asia. The US has a lot of force projection capabilities such as aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, strategic bombers. They can also create ICBM's, and they're probably looking at SpaceX's capabilities in Earth-to-Space-to-Earth deployments. They can also build, they just don't want to, because things are expensive. Its not like they don't have the capability to build, or the expertise. Its that they don't have the will to spend the money. That can change.

So my belief is that the overseas bases are an aspect of the MIC in general, but not critical to the US core interest. The overseas bases save money for the US, otherwise they'd have to build maybe twice as many strategic assets like the B-2, the Ford-Class, the Virginia and the Ohio classes. Which don't go away when the overseas bases go away... but will go away if either the USD or the MIC fall.

Furthermore, I think although some countries have pulled away from the US, there's Japan, South Korea, and soon Australia and India who will still allow the US (and in the case of Japan, India and Australia) join in on any attack on China. And the only reason SK won't join in is because of NK - the SK gov't is entirely dictated to by the US just like Japan.

So even if the US overseas bases and alliances get chipped away by China, a country like Thailand isn't a critical aspect to the Alliance system, because the US still has and will most likely always have SK, Japan, Australia.

I'm also going to add, and sorry for the double post, that yea, both the MIC and the USD are incredibly well protected and mammoth institutions for which trying to take down is basically impossible.

But chipping away at it little by little, like the US is chipping away at China's counter-Taiwanese independence, is what needs to happen. Its always just a tiny little, "c'mon what's the big deal?" step forward. And if you can shake the MIC or the USD just a little, you'll be shaking the very foundations of the US.

Fedupwithlies said:

Ok, but I'm not convinced the US will back down if they lose their bases in Asia. The US has a lot of force projection capabilities such as aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, strategic bombers. They can also create ICBM's, and they're probably looking at SpaceX's capabilities in Earth-to-Space-to-Earth deployments. They can also build, they just don't want to, because things are expensive. Its not like they don't have the capability to build, or the expertise. Its that they don't have the will to spend the money. That can change.

So my belief is that the overseas bases are an aspect of the MIC in general, but not critical to the US core interest. The overseas bases save money for the US, otherwise they'd have to build maybe twice as many strategic assets like the B-2, the Ford-Class, the Virginia and the Ohio classes. Which don't go away when the overseas bases go away... but will go away if either the USD or the MIC fall.

Furthermore, I think although some countries have pulled away from the US, there's Japan, South Korea, and soon Australia and India who will still allow the US (and in the case of Japan, India and Australia) join in on any attack on China. And the only reason SK won't join in is because of NK - the SK gov't is entirely dictated to by the US just like Japan.

So even if the US overseas bases and alliances get chipped away by China, a country like Thailand isn't a critical aspect to the Alliance system, because the US still has and will most likely always have SK, Japan, Australia.

Click to expand...

Which is why this topic ultimately ties in with nukes, missile defense, and MAD.

Fedupwithlies said:

Ok, but I'm not convinced the US will back down if they lose their bases in Asia.

Click to expand...

Yes they will.

Chairman Mao taught us that the Americans are not reasonable. Give them no choice, then they are reasonable.

That would be the short answer to that.

Fedupwithlies said:

I'm also going to add, and sorry for the double post, that yea, both the MIC and the USD are incredibly well protected and mammoth institutions for which trying to take down is basically impossible.

But chipping away at it little by little, like the US is chipping away at China's counter-Taiwanese independence, is what needs to happen. Its always just a tiny little, "c'mon what's the big deal?" step forward. And if you can shake the MIC or the USD just a little, you'll be shaking the very foundations of the US.

Click to expand...

This is a very important strategic point.

The USD and the industrial capability are sources of strengths for the United States.

However that does not automatically mean those are a center of gravity for this warfare between China and United States.

This exactly gets to a famous quote Chairman Mao said.

"They fight their war, I'll fight mine."