Steve, China has been quite restrained w/ PH for the past 24 years if you know the history of this rock. This is still the US-CN geopolitical chess. One factor is that it's sovereignty over a reef at the critical water way that CN can't afford to give up (which the ROC should mind but doesn't), the second and more important factor is the US' barging in again to sabotage CN's effort to conclude the Code of Conduct of the SCS with ASEAN (it's on it's 3rd version already after more than 10 years' of negotiation). I do consider CN is wise to try to reach compromise on all the border disputes (12 out of 14 land border disputes were settled before 2010), and a joint declaration was reached between CN and ASEAN on the SCS in 2012, pending negotiation of the code of conduct of all parties. The key intention is parties in the area settle their differences through discussion and shared economic benefit, instead of letting an out-of-region player like the US plays claimants against each other and therefore cause conflicts and unrest in the region. 仁爱礁was claimed by CN for hundreds years and PH grounded a decommissioned warship on it to claim it on 9 May 1991 (the day after US bombed CN embassy in Belgrade). The dispute flared and was suspended for so many years, only pushed to be acute by PH b/c of the US is behind it: it does PH and its ppl zero good attempting to have a military showdown with CN, PH won't get anything, the US wont' support the PH in the event of a military conflict with CN (the US rejected PH's request to join its military showdown w/ CN re another piece of reef in 2012 on the ground that US doesn't get involved in a territorial dispute, and deceived PH to surrender that reef to CN, so the result was that CN gained complete control). It's most highly likely Marcos' been corrupted by the US by offers relating his family assets confiscated in the US and numerous pending suits against himself and his family. Marcos was the first head of state to visit BJ in 2023 (if you understand CN gov, this is highly symbolic and shows that CN gov takes Marcus as a close friend and cherished partner), and returned with over US$20billion investment agreements from CN. Then the US sent ppl to visit, and then Marcos started to turn 180 degrees, then the military bases and stuff. This is mostly geopolitics between CN with the US.
East Asia has been relatively peaceful since the end of the Vietnam war, it’s good going for everyone except for the arms industrial lobbies in Washington.
Very good discussion and both of you are very knowledgeable about this important topic. Few comments. 1) While DPP will not cross the formal read line, PRC will not wait for long. Because in about 10 years most of the Chinese on Taiwan who support unification would die out. This will make the ruling after taking Taiwan extremely difficult. So Xi will not wait more than 10 years. 2) While Russia, including Putin, want to join the West, especially NATO. US will not allow that. Because once Russia is in EU or NATO, US will loss control of them. Putin became anti-west only after the failure of joining NATO and the plan if NATO expansion to Ukraine and Georgia in 2008. 3) Russia was not that Good to China before 2008. Russia actually was treated India much better than China before 2008. So it was America’s color-revolution against everyone drove Russia into Chinese arm and Ukraine war solidified this strategic relationship. So US is the driver as it is still the sole superpower.
I'm not sure about your first point. I think despite all the American influence in Taiwan people are moving away from the fanatical pro-independence stance and they're losing power. The longer China waits, the less costly it'll take for her to retake Taiwan irrefutably. Within 2 decades or so the dollar will lose so much value, along with many other reasons, that America will genuinely, undeniably, look chaotic and not idolized. Pair this with China's increasing economy and technological advancements I think minds will change. The West worship will die down. Also on your last point I completely disagree. Outside America and her vassals China is more liked than America. America's soft power eclipses China's in the modern day, but in actual connections, trade, and dependency, China is MORE influential. It is a richer country in PPP terms and within a few decades surpassed America in several important technological fields. The argument, unless I misunderstand, that America is the sole superpower is nonsense. And I daresay hints at the aforementioned West worship, and the enduring belief that colored people can't catch up to the whites.
These people continues to delude themselves on US military might and underestimate China's. Why are they so sure the PLAN can only get a "rough fix" on US carrier fleet? Is it not possible for Chinese satellites to monitor in real-time all warships movements in Hawaii, Guam, Yokosuka and Okinawa? China's satellite technology is so advanced. If not, then it is only a matter of time before it acquired this capability....The fact that China is unperturbed with all the military bases the US has in South Korea, Japan, Philippine and Australia is because it knows what is going on in all those bases all the time and is able to hit them decisively in the event of a conflict.
Another amazing discussion. For those who are interested in diving into this topic further. Check out Eurasia naval insight. He objectively goes over all the major vessels China and US has. One can see in these comparisons that aside from the flight 3 Burke. All other US vessel are quite outdated compared to the newer Chinese vessels like the type 55 and 52d. Another channel did a mock scenario of a single 52D vs entire Taiwan surface fleet. And the 52D easily sunk the entire fleet.
@HoLeeFook68 Everyone keep on assuming that US will get involved in a continuation of Chinese civil war. In that case, USA will have to fire the first shoot. The Chinese WILL not give the USA a Casus Beli in attacking US ships or base first. It would be stupidity of the first degree. Ask yourself if you are a US citizen like me. Would you get into a tussel with another nuclear power? Considering we haven't done that for Ukraine. A country that we PROMISED to protect in case of war in the 90's when Ukraine gave up over 3000 nuclear warheads in the Budapest memorandum. Yet we only supply weapons and have not militarily involved ourselves against Russian Federation. Why? may be those 2-3000 nukes Russia has? Same rational apply here with China. Despite all the bluster coming out of DC. No one has the cajones in DC to risk nuclear war over what the entire global south would perceive as a Chinese civil war continuation. Since the two sides never signed an armistice or treaty. Both sides claim to be the rightful ruler of all of China. Taiwan in fact still claims Mongolia which Beijing has allowed to become independent in the 50's. Go look at a map of China by Taiwan. Additionally in case you didn't know. The communists were a wing within the nationalist party. During the fight against Japanese, the communist soldiers/army wore nationalist uniforms and officers held official rank within the nationalist government.
It's a great discussion, thank you both. The most important aspect of this discussion is that the likelihood of China to initiate attacks on the US soil or even territories is zero--the US will only need to encounter China if it wants to actively militarily contain or roll China back in China's own place and in its civil war with ROC. Xi repeated again in SF that CN doesn't want to replace the US, and two or three days ago the first vice Foreign Minister Liu Jianchao visited the US and made a speech at The Council of Foreign Affairs, he repeated that China doesn't not want to change the order set by the US...This is even a bit humiliating in my view, but China is still trying to be the adult to appease the US, so unless the US or Taiwan went crazy, the chance for CN to even initiate a military conflict over Taiwan is practically zero. The grounds for CN to initiate military take over of TW is written in law, there are 3 of them, 1. Taiwan independence; 2. events/situ that are deemed to be independence; 3. a catch all provision.
how do you know whether any of your friends are trustworthy? there are many aspects of it, most importantly, you observe what they do, what actually happens and compare those with what they say, against the large context of the country's history, culture, its track records, their strength and weaknesses, each of Chinese officials have a long track record, unlike the Western leaders...in any event, someone with a closed mind or the urge to project your own motive upon Chinese, will never get close to understand them---the attempt to demonise the other will kill any possibility of knowing the other party. Granted most ppl will never know, and most ppl never are interested in learning, so they gulp down propaganda and be brainwashed.@@christophervaughan2637
@@dancerinmaya6813 the problem with your reply is that you do no more than claim they have a history of being trustworthy but provide no evidence whatsoever, never mind any convincing evidence, of the truth of your statement. So how do I know you are telling a truth about these Chinese officials? I don’t know because you are expecting me only to trust your word. This is the definition of propaganda. You are the propagandist and have tried to make me trust your word while presenting no evidence your are trustworthy in your assessment of these Chinese officials you mentioned
I think the status-quo is what the US and Taiwan want also. The west is happy not to recognise Taiwan as a country as long as it keeps it's independence from the mainland.
@@dancerinmaya6813 the mistake you make here is to think I only making this observation about Chinese politicians. It’s true for politicians of every country. What they say is not necessarily what they are thinking. The problem is that you cannot provide any evidence here that what they are saying is really what they are thinking.
China is just reacting to US initiatives. 1996, Clinton deployed two aircraft carriers to the Taiwan Straits. In response, China embarked on an extensive technological advancement initiative, focusing on developing hypersonic missiles, satellite systems, the BeiDou GPS system, and over-the-horizon radar, along with integrating drone technology. In 2011, the Wolf Amendment was introduced in the USA, aiming to exclude China from participating in the US NASA space program. In response, China forged ahead with its independent space endeavors, establishing its own space station. Simultaneously, 2011 witnessed the Obama administration's strategic shift, known as the "Pivot to Asia," involving the deployment of US military bases in Australia and the exclusion of China from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), coupled with wargaming scenarios envisioning a sea blockade of Chinese shipping. Responding decisively, China, under the leadership of Xi Jinping in 2013, initiated strategic moves such as the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Belt and Road Initiative, and the construction of artificial islands in the South China Sea. In 2015, China launched the ambitious "Made in China 2025" initiative, marking a commitment to become a global leader in advanced manufacturing. Observing the successful use of drones in the Ukraine conflict, a potentially useful non-lethal augmentation is a laser. If the laser is mounted on a multi-axis gimbal system in an FPV drone, it can stay focused on a single spot even when the drone is performing complex maneuvers. A swarm of drones can be programmed to synchronize their pulses to target a single spot. A lithium-ion 600 Wh battery pack, weighing less than 3 kg, can deliver more than one thousand two-second pulses of 1000 watts. There is no recharge time necessary; the limit is cooling time to prevent overheating. Two thousand joules will raise the temperature of 2g of wood by 588 degrees Celsius. This is the same amount of energy as in a 32-gram bullet at 353 m/s. Laser diodes more powerful than 1000 watts are readily available off the shelf.
China has superior and capacity to overcome any technological difficulties. The Russians had the master plan and instruct ions for the construction of the Wuhan 😢 Socialist Bridge. They took it away when Mao broke off with Stalin. The Beatles projected Chinese slmply carried on and complete the the earliest processs Wuhan Socialist and Bridge.
53:00 - I doubt Russia & China would be so intertwined that Russia would extend its nuclear deterrence umbrella to the PRC. However, the current state of US-Russian relations pretty much guarantees that the US cannot devote its entire deployed nuclear arsenal vs the PRC in a first strike. The US would have to maintain a "minimal deterrence" if its own against Russia. This - coupled with the PLARF's buildup of silo-ed DF-41s, as well as theater nuclear weapons (e.g. DF-26/DF-27) means that the US would no longer have a viable option of resorting to nuclear deterrence in a Taiwan reunification scenario.
I wish both US and China can focus on cooperation rather than confronatation. No one wins in a divided world against existential threats of climate change, AI and arms race.
24:00 - with regards to the significance of the DF-27, yes, having what's essentially a "conventional" ICBM would certainly be useful for hitting US bases such as Pearl Harbor, but what's equally significant - if not more so - is that this HGV-armed ICBM can hit just about any US base in the Indian Ocean (e.g. Diego Garcia, Bahrain, etc.), & do so from the relative safety of the PRC's vast western interiors (i.e. Xinjiang, Tibet, etc.). One of the PRC's main concerns about a war with the US is that the latter doesn't necessarily have to directly engage the PLAN on its own turf. The US has the option of standing back & imposing a blockade, & do tremendous damage to PRC trade. This strategy would be particularly effective in the Indian Ocean, where the PLAN's naval presence is relatively negligible compared to that of the USN. A US standoff blockade wouldn't be able to prevent reunification with Taiwan, but would hugely disruptive the PRC's economic development. Deploying the DF-27 means that the PLARF now has the ability to undermine such a blockade & impose costs on the US, even if it can't break such a blockade outright at the moment.
China spent the last 30 years working out a system to take out the USN in the Pacific. Americans were overconfident and arrogant to believe that China cannot achieve what they desired. I believe Russia did give China some technology and China did the rest. China also built replicas of carriers and ships on the Gobi desert. These models run on rails in all directions. Using these models the Chinese refined their targeting systems. They even have a ballistic missile which can go 360* round the globe and strike the enemy from behind. Now with ground and satellite systems in place, China can monitor in real time ALL ships of the USN. The moment a strike force leaves Guam, it is already targeted. Within a minute it will be hit by multiple missiles. That is why every war game in the SCS has the USN suffering severe losses.
What signs? I think you mean unfounded assumptions. This idea that China, with zero actual war fighting experience, is going to pull off the most complex and difficult military operation in the history of warfare is laughable. What if their unproven hypersonic anti-ship missiles don't work? How do they cross the 180km Taiwan Strait without getting destroyed by anti-ship missiles that are proven to work? Even if they manage to land a few hundred thousand men in first few days and eventually the 2 million+ that would be needed, how will they be logistically supported when their ships and land forces would be under constant attack? I think all the signs point to China being a paper tiger.
54:40 - also keep in mind that the PRC has the largest reserves of shale gas in the world, & is #3 in terms of shale oil reserves. The only obstacle for the PRC is high cost & environmental degradation. The notion that China is "energy poor" is a outdated one. A US blockade vs PRC shipping in the Indian Ocean will be highly disruptive, but not even close to being "fatal" in the event of a war vs the US, considering the PRC's overland energy corridors with Central Asia, its own energy reserves, as well as its rapid deployment of clean tech, along with next gen energy technology such as thorium reactors.
Shale resources take years to get up and running. China would be very energy poor for the first years of a trade blockade. And it cannot count on Central Asia.
@@stephenyang2844 US scheming end of WW2. Oi Japan, no war crime for u, just hand out over all Biological experimental stuffs and be a good lacky and all that, US'll see u right.
@@stephenyang2844 US scheming end of WW2. Oi Japan, no Japan war crime investigation, just hand over all BIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENTAL DATA, be a good lacky and US'll rewrite WW2 history of history as a bonus... Good boy! Fetch!
China isn't forcing the US to deploy the new Sentinel ballistic missile. The 50 year old Minute Man III missile life can no longer be extended. The US is revamping ALL major weapons systems: US is doubling cruise missile production next year going to 1000/year, US air to air missiles production pushed up 40% a few months ago (100 unit/month now), US is preparing to replace a generation of fighter aircraft and helicopters with Gen 6 fighters, 6 x B-21 bombers prototypes also rolling out, ballistic missile and attack subs also.
great episode. love to heat what you guys have to say about drones, AI, space tech, military robotics in the future. lastly wars are not just about weapons, otherwise yankistan wouldn't have lost in Afghanistan and Iraq or Korea in 1950s. there are just and unjust wars and there is the human factor of national pride, dignity, grit and commitment
USA didnt lost in afghanistan, iraq, or korea. What kind of analysis do you have lol? Americas objective in Afghanistan was to kill osama and take al queda out of the country, both objectives completed. Iraq was to remove saddam from power, objective completed. Koreas was to stop the invasion south korea by north korea, objective completed.
You all should be talking about peace. How to maintain peace and prevents war instead of stroking about weaponry. As every action invite counter reactions and it will stay that way until the others gave up for some reasons. If the US keep projecting power snd interference upon others and to lord over others, ultimately there will be the day to face some serious challenges, This is not about to bring down the US military but to be free from being bullied and threatened by the US. And, the only way out is to be strong militarily thst cam keep the US at bay. I don't see anything wrong about this as it focus on keeping the US navy's fleets from closing in to strike. Hence, the possession of hylersonic missiles to defend their shores. However, to say that these missiles by the countries who possessed are thresthening the US military is BS propagandas as the aggressors here are the US. If the US just turn away their ships and military bases, these missiles arent gonna targetting any US assets at home. Hence, no real need to counteract with new missiles unless you really have plan for attacking them.
I think that the border dispute with India with respect to Arunachal Pradesh, former Sth. Tibet will be the stumbling block. For 70+ decades, successive Indian leaders have convinced that it was part of the British and therefore must become Indian at Independence. The other parts of the border can be negotiated because they were undefined cartographically and wisdom will prevail, but the fact of renaming Arunachal Pradesh nearly 40 years after independence is a clear and conscious ploy to shake off its questionable uncertainty of ownership. Wiser Indian leaders in the future will have to convince it was usurped from Tibet and hence China by the presence of Tawang, in AP, which was the birthday place of the 14th Dalai Lama. The longer it takes to settle this issue, the issue of habitants in AP, will complicate the issue. Indians are highly emotional and the legacy of being a colony of Britain, has left scars in their psyche which are almost impossible to erase, except in combat when they are without a choice in defeat. The Chinese would like to avoid this, but if they in winning a war, would give part of AP back to the Indians, the vanity of the Indians could be satisfied. However, Indian leader must relent in allowing its media to advocate that India was magnanimous in correcting an injustice perpetrated by the British. I can’t see that there is another solution because from Nehru, every succeeding Indian PM, had claimed AP, being controlled by the British at the time of granting Indian independence, must become an unalienable part of the new Republic. Nagaland, has been conducting insurrection since the beginning, claiming the tribal leaders had sought British administration, not being subjugated as a British territory. And had sought its own independence a year prior but India objected this distinction. The other former states which were administered by the British as the NE Frontier, each has different status in respect of being actual subjugated colonies of Britain. Most of the inhabitants of these areas have East Asian features and are distinctly different from Indians. Indians are intellectually very astute, but their emotional ego impedes them from making astute decisions.
Sorry but the discussions did not look into using the Art of War, Sun Zi, which the Chinese (or East) would always try to follow. Attacking Guam, Japan or any US base would meant an all-out war, which either side to win MUST eliminate other side. Almost like Israel fighting Hamas without wiping out the Palestine is tall order. And not looking into Chinese military tactics would be like expecting top martial artists to just go in head & fists first, just because got bigger fist. I know the American approach is often quite direct (and predictable), big guns, air superiority, strategic targeting - to knock out and hope other side surrender. That's not the East Asian experience and approach, they will continue to fight... like the Japan if not for the two A-bombs. If I refer to Sun Zi Art of War, my guess that China will start sinking some "illegal fishing boats" near the carrier fleet, 1500 - 2000 miles from the mainland coast. That will keep the American fleets out of the war. One chess piece to null entire pacific fleet. Japan (& Korea) will not want to be involved, due to the history.
It might sound counter intuitive, but TRF will probably be solved by automation. A lot of what causes TRF is the stress of work, the delayed or deferred human interaction due to intense workload. With more automation work load might start to drop on a per person basis and that would encourage more human interaction and greater birthrate. It's hard to say if they'd implement that step to lower work hours, but they are definitely going full steam ahead with automation.
Everyone who thinks about these things knows that China will make the first attack. I could ask my 12-year-old to strategize what might happen and he would come up with all of these things you assert that no one would strategizing ever think of. This is borderline silly.
The CIS said specifically that they didn't game out China attacking American forces directly and encircling Taiwan and ignoring a full amphibious assault until Taiwan gives in. This seems like the more likely and likely to be successful scenario for China. The game they played had a direct amphibious assault. It would make more sense to avoid that from China's point of view. I think TP is right that Taiwan doesn't have the food or energy to last very long against a blockade. And if Trump wins he's already said he wouldn't fight China over Taiwan. A tragedy for Taiwan to lose its freedom.
The belligerent USA is quite capable of winning battles. But winning a war? ............Still searching my memory bank when it won one. Was it Panama or Nicaragua?
Perhaps I’ve been listening to too many think tanks but a large amount of the commentary seems over-simplified. Which is not to say some interesting ‘ground’ facts aren’t presented, just that entire and very relevant concepts aren’t integrated into conclusions. Command and control? Limitations imposed on Satellite surveillance based on orbital mechanics? Plasma sheaths on hypersonic reentry vehicles? Alliance incentives impacting China’s most successful strategy RE blockade vs invasion, poor readiness of the PLARF and US, signals intelligence… etc
The American think tank cannot be trusted....they are all mouth pcs for more military spending. ON Taiwan ask about a Taiwan blockade instead of a direct invasion they go quiet...no answer....no response!
Yeah his takes were awful and almost 100% objectively incorrect. China being able to take out a carrier... lol? China being able to make 100 j15s a year when they have 60 in service from the start production date of 2013... lol? Can't think of a single thing he said off the top of my head that was correct.
Steve, China has been quite restrained w/ PH for the past 24 years if you know the history of this rock. This is still the US-CN geopolitical chess.
One factor is that it's sovereignty over a reef at the critical water way that CN can't afford to give up (which the ROC should mind but doesn't), the second and more important factor is the US' barging in again to sabotage CN's effort to conclude the Code of Conduct of the SCS with ASEAN (it's on it's 3rd version already after more than 10 years' of negotiation). I do consider CN is wise to try to reach compromise on all the border disputes (12 out of 14 land border disputes were settled before 2010), and a joint declaration was reached between CN and ASEAN on the SCS in 2012, pending negotiation of the code of conduct of all parties. The key intention is parties in the area settle their differences through discussion and shared economic benefit, instead of letting an out-of-region player like the US plays claimants against each other and therefore cause conflicts and unrest in the region.
仁爱礁was claimed by CN for hundreds years and PH grounded a decommissioned warship on it to claim it on 9 May 1991 (the day after US bombed CN embassy in Belgrade). The dispute flared and was suspended for so many years, only pushed to be acute by PH b/c of the US is behind it: it does PH and its ppl zero good attempting to have a military showdown with CN, PH won't get anything, the US wont' support the PH in the event of a military conflict with CN (the US rejected PH's request to join its military showdown w/ CN re another piece of reef in 2012 on the ground that US doesn't get involved in a territorial dispute, and deceived PH to surrender that reef to CN, so the result was that CN gained complete control).
It's most highly likely Marcos' been corrupted by the US by offers relating his family assets confiscated in the US and numerous pending suits against himself and his family.
Marcos was the first head of state to visit BJ in 2023 (if you understand CN gov, this is highly symbolic and shows that CN gov takes Marcus as a close friend and cherished partner), and returned with over US$20billion investment agreements from CN. Then the US sent ppl to visit, and then Marcos started to turn 180 degrees, then the military bases and stuff.
This is mostly geopolitics between CN with the US.
Well said. Marcus put his own interest before the people of PH. US would love to have PH or Taiwan to fight a proxy war like the one in Ukraine.
East Asia has been relatively peaceful since the end of the Vietnam war, it’s good going for everyone except for the arms industrial lobbies in Washington.
Very good discussion and both of you are very knowledgeable about this important topic.
Few comments.
1) While DPP will not cross the formal read line, PRC will not wait for long. Because in about 10 years most of the Chinese on Taiwan who support unification would die out. This will make the ruling after taking Taiwan extremely difficult. So Xi will not wait more than 10 years.
2) While Russia, including Putin, want to join the West, especially NATO. US will not allow that. Because once Russia is in EU or NATO, US will loss control of them. Putin became anti-west only after the failure of joining NATO and the plan if NATO expansion to Ukraine and Georgia in 2008.
3) Russia was not that Good to China before 2008. Russia actually was treated India much better than China before 2008. So it was America’s color-revolution against everyone drove Russia into Chinese arm and Ukraine war solidified this strategic relationship.
So US is the driver as it is still the sole superpower.
I'm not sure about your first point. I think despite all the American influence in Taiwan people are moving away from the fanatical pro-independence stance and they're losing power. The longer China waits, the less costly it'll take for her to retake Taiwan irrefutably. Within 2 decades or so the dollar will lose so much value, along with many other reasons, that America will genuinely, undeniably, look chaotic and not idolized. Pair this with China's increasing economy and technological advancements I think minds will change. The West worship will die down.
Also on your last point I completely disagree. Outside America and her vassals China is more liked than America. America's soft power eclipses China's in the modern day, but in actual connections, trade, and dependency, China is MORE influential. It is a richer country in PPP terms and within a few decades surpassed America in several important technological fields. The argument, unless I misunderstand, that America is the sole superpower is nonsense. And I daresay hints at the aforementioned West worship, and the enduring belief that colored people can't catch up to the whites.
If China attacks Taiwan they will hate the mainland forever.
It’s SuperBully USA.
The assumption in the west is that no one can shoot a 2k long target from air even though this kind of weapons exist for atleast 3 decades.
These people continues to delude themselves on US military might and underestimate China's. Why are they so sure the PLAN can only get a "rough fix" on US carrier fleet? Is it not possible for Chinese satellites to monitor in real-time all warships movements in Hawaii, Guam, Yokosuka and Okinawa? China's satellite technology is so advanced. If not, then it is only a matter of time before it acquired this capability....The fact that China is unperturbed with all the military bases the US has in South Korea, Japan, Philippine and Australia is because it knows what is going on in all those bases all the time and is able to hit them decisively in the event of a conflict.
Orbital mechanics
Another amazing discussion. For those who are interested in diving into this topic further. Check out Eurasia naval insight. He objectively goes over all the major vessels China and US has. One can see in these comparisons that aside from the flight 3 Burke. All other US vessel are quite outdated compared to the newer Chinese vessels like the type 55 and 52d. Another channel did a mock scenario of a single 52D vs entire Taiwan surface fleet. And the 52D easily sunk the entire fleet.
@HoLeeFook68 Everyone keep on assuming that US will get involved in a continuation of Chinese civil war. In that case, USA will have to fire the first shoot. The Chinese WILL not give the USA a Casus Beli in attacking US ships or base first. It would be stupidity of the first degree. Ask yourself if you are a US citizen like me. Would you get into a tussel with another nuclear power? Considering we haven't done that for Ukraine. A country that we PROMISED to protect in case of war in the 90's when Ukraine gave up over 3000 nuclear warheads in the Budapest memorandum. Yet we only supply weapons and have not militarily involved ourselves against Russian Federation. Why? may be those 2-3000 nukes Russia has? Same rational apply here with China. Despite all the bluster coming out of DC. No one has the cajones in DC to risk nuclear war over what the entire global south would perceive as a Chinese civil war continuation. Since the two sides never signed an armistice or treaty. Both sides claim to be the rightful ruler of all of China. Taiwan in fact still claims Mongolia which Beijing has allowed to become independent in the 50's. Go look at a map of China by Taiwan. Additionally in case you didn't know. The communists were a wing within the nationalist party. During the fight against Japanese, the communist soldiers/army wore nationalist uniforms and officers held official rank within the nationalist government.
Was that in Raw Thunder?
It's a great discussion, thank you both.
The most important aspect of this discussion is that the likelihood of China to initiate attacks on the US soil or even territories is zero--the US will only need to encounter China if it wants to actively militarily contain or roll China back in China's own place and in its civil war with ROC.
Xi repeated again in SF that CN doesn't want to replace the US, and two or three days ago the first vice Foreign Minister Liu Jianchao visited the US and made a speech at The Council of Foreign Affairs, he repeated that China doesn't not want to change the order set by the US...This is even a bit humiliating in my view, but China is still trying to be the adult to appease the US, so unless the US or Taiwan went crazy, the chance for CN to even initiate a military conflict over Taiwan is practically zero.
The grounds for CN to initiate military take over of TW is written in law, there are 3 of them, 1. Taiwan independence; 2. events/situ that are deemed to be independence; 3. a catch all provision.
How do you know that what a Chinese leader or government representative says is actually what they are really thinking?
how do you know whether any of your friends are trustworthy?
there are many aspects of it, most importantly, you observe what they do, what actually happens and compare those with what they say, against the large context of the country's history, culture, its track records, their strength and weaknesses, each of Chinese officials have a long track record, unlike the Western leaders...in any event, someone with a closed mind or the urge to project your own motive upon Chinese, will never get close to understand them---the attempt to demonise the other will kill any possibility of knowing the other party.
Granted most ppl will never know, and most ppl never are interested in learning, so they gulp down propaganda and be brainwashed.@@christophervaughan2637
@@dancerinmaya6813 the problem with your reply is that you do no more than claim they have a history of being trustworthy but provide no evidence whatsoever, never mind any convincing evidence, of the truth of your statement. So how do I know you are telling a truth about these Chinese officials? I don’t know because you are expecting me only to trust your word. This is the definition of propaganda. You are the propagandist and have tried to make me trust your word while presenting no evidence your are trustworthy in your assessment of these Chinese officials you mentioned
I think the status-quo is what the US and Taiwan want also. The west is happy not to recognise Taiwan as a country as long as it keeps it's independence from the mainland.
@@dancerinmaya6813 the mistake you make here is to think I only making this observation about Chinese politicians. It’s true for politicians of every country. What they say is not necessarily what they are thinking.
The problem is that you cannot provide any evidence here that what they are saying is really what they are thinking.
Im glad you have a sound bar instead of a video. I can mute and read the sound bar 😂
China is just reacting to US initiatives.
1996, Clinton deployed two aircraft carriers to the Taiwan Straits. In response, China embarked on an extensive technological advancement initiative, focusing on developing hypersonic missiles, satellite systems, the BeiDou GPS system, and over-the-horizon radar, along with integrating drone technology.
In 2011, the Wolf Amendment was introduced in the USA, aiming to exclude China from participating in the US NASA space program. In response, China forged ahead with its independent space endeavors, establishing its own space station.
Simultaneously, 2011 witnessed the Obama administration's strategic shift, known as the "Pivot to Asia," involving the deployment of US military bases in Australia and the exclusion of China from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), coupled with wargaming scenarios envisioning a sea blockade of Chinese shipping. Responding decisively, China, under the leadership of Xi Jinping in 2013, initiated strategic moves such as the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Belt and Road Initiative, and the construction of artificial islands in the South China Sea. In 2015, China launched the ambitious "Made in China 2025" initiative, marking a commitment to become a global leader in advanced manufacturing.
Observing the successful use of drones in the Ukraine conflict, a potentially useful non-lethal augmentation is a laser. If the laser is mounted on a multi-axis gimbal system in an FPV drone, it can stay focused on a single spot even when the drone is performing complex maneuvers. A swarm of drones can be programmed to synchronize their pulses to target a single spot. A lithium-ion 600 Wh battery pack, weighing less than 3 kg, can deliver more than one thousand two-second pulses of 1000 watts. There is no recharge time necessary; the limit is cooling time to prevent overheating. Two thousand joules will raise the temperature of 2g of wood by 588 degrees Celsius. This is the same amount of energy as in a 32-gram bullet at 353 m/s. Laser diodes more powerful than 1000 watts are readily available off the shelf.
China has superior and capacity to overcome any technological difficulties. The Russians had the master plan
and instruct ions for the construction of the Wuhan 😢
Socialist Bridge. They took it away when Mao broke off with Stalin.
The Beatles projected Chinese slmply
carried on and complete the the earliest processs Wuhan Socialist and Bridge.
add There's something weird in the keypad. Word s
are added on - and editing not acessible.
Keep it up Steve
53:00 - I doubt Russia & China would be so intertwined that Russia would extend its nuclear deterrence umbrella to the PRC. However, the current state of US-Russian relations pretty much guarantees that the US cannot devote its entire deployed nuclear arsenal vs the PRC in a first strike. The US would have to maintain a "minimal deterrence" if its own against Russia. This - coupled with the PLARF's buildup of silo-ed DF-41s, as well as theater nuclear weapons (e.g. DF-26/DF-27) means that the US would no longer have a viable option of resorting to nuclear deterrence in a Taiwan reunification scenario.
You don't seem to understand the meaning of deterrence.
Your argument means USA should strike first, ad soon as possible.... Smart.
I don't think China needs a third party's deterrence for her own survival. As it is, she should be able to deter anyone ...
I wish both US and China can focus on cooperation rather than confronatation. No one wins in a divided world against existential threats of climate change, AI and arms race.
24:00 - with regards to the significance of the DF-27, yes, having what's essentially a "conventional" ICBM would certainly be useful for hitting US bases such as Pearl Harbor, but what's equally significant - if not more so - is that this HGV-armed ICBM can hit just about any US base in the Indian Ocean (e.g. Diego Garcia, Bahrain, etc.), & do so from the relative safety of the PRC's vast western interiors (i.e. Xinjiang, Tibet, etc.). One of the PRC's main concerns about a war with the US is that the latter doesn't necessarily have to directly engage the PLAN on its own turf. The US has the option of standing back & imposing a blockade, & do tremendous damage to PRC trade. This strategy would be particularly effective in the Indian Ocean, where the PLAN's naval presence is relatively negligible compared to that of the USN. A US standoff blockade wouldn't be able to prevent reunification with Taiwan, but would hugely disruptive the PRC's economic development. Deploying the DF-27 means that the PLARF now has the ability to undermine such a blockade & impose costs on the US, even if it can't break such a blockade outright at the moment.
You don't seem to understand how naval blockades work.
@HoLeeFook68 It will probably shoot thousands of cruise missiles back.
China spent the last 30 years working out a system to take out the USN in the Pacific. Americans were overconfident and arrogant to believe that China cannot achieve what they desired. I believe Russia did give China some technology and China did the rest. China also built replicas of carriers and ships on the Gobi desert. These models run on rails in all directions. Using these models the Chinese refined their targeting systems. They even have a ballistic missile which can go 360* round the globe and strike the enemy from behind. Now with ground and satellite systems in place, China can monitor in real time ALL ships of the USN. The moment a strike force leaves Guam, it is already targeted. Within a minute it will be hit by multiple missiles. That is why every war game in the SCS has the USN suffering severe losses.
1:13:30
US just fired a electronic warfare air wing commander, who just came back from SCS. Tell me who won an e-fight.
It is sad, but all signs show that the West stands no chance
What signs? I think you mean unfounded assumptions. This idea that China, with zero actual war fighting experience, is going to pull off the most complex and difficult military operation in the history of warfare is laughable.
What if their unproven hypersonic anti-ship missiles don't work? How do they cross the 180km Taiwan Strait without getting destroyed by anti-ship missiles that are proven to work? Even if they manage to land a few hundred thousand men in first few days and eventually the 2 million+ that would be needed, how will they be logistically supported when their ships and land forces would be under constant attack?
I think all the signs point to China being a paper tiger.
Not sad..good...The war mongers are all from the west😅
37:00
This part of the discussion is too simplistic.
54:40 - also keep in mind that the PRC has the largest reserves of shale gas in the world, & is #3 in terms of shale oil reserves. The only obstacle for the PRC is high cost & environmental degradation. The notion that China is "energy poor" is a outdated one. A US blockade vs PRC shipping in the Indian Ocean will be highly disruptive, but not even close to being "fatal" in the event of a war vs the US, considering the PRC's overland energy corridors with Central Asia, its own energy reserves, as well as its rapid deployment of clean tech, along with next gen energy technology such as thorium reactors.
Shale resources take years to get up and running. China would be very energy poor for the first years of a trade blockade. And it cannot count on Central Asia.
please do a podcast with Andrei martyanov
US haven't won any war a good example is Syria and Ukraine action speaks louder than words
We need energy weapons now to deal with hypersonics.
Is Japan giving China the opportinity to repay Japanese ww2 war crimes in China?
Japan never even admit to what they did in China.
@@stephenyang2844 US scheming end of WW2. Oi Japan, no war crime for u, just hand out over all Biological experimental stuffs and be a good lacky and all that, US'll see u right.
@@stephenyang2844 US scheming end of WW2. Oi Japan, no Japan war crime investigation, just hand over all BIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENTAL DATA, be a good lacky and US'll rewrite WW2 history of history as a bonus... Good boy! Fetch!
China isn't forcing the US to deploy the new Sentinel ballistic missile. The 50 year old Minute Man III missile life can no longer be extended. The US is revamping ALL major weapons systems: US is doubling cruise missile production next year going to 1000/year, US air to air missiles production pushed up 40% a few months ago (100 unit/month now), US is preparing to replace a generation of fighter aircraft and helicopters with Gen 6 fighters, 6 x B-21 bombers prototypes also rolling out, ballistic missile and attack subs also.
Check out the economy of Taiwan over the next 5 years...
great episode. love to heat what you guys have to say about drones, AI, space tech, military robotics in the future. lastly wars are not just about weapons, otherwise yankistan wouldn't have lost in Afghanistan and Iraq or Korea in 1950s. there are just and unjust wars and there is the human factor of national pride, dignity, grit and commitment
USA didnt lost in afghanistan, iraq, or korea. What kind of analysis do you have lol? Americas objective in Afghanistan was to kill osama and take al queda out of the country, both objectives completed. Iraq was to remove saddam from power, objective completed. Koreas was to stop the invasion south korea by north korea, objective completed.
TP doesn't like to show his face? 😜
You all should be talking about peace. How to maintain peace and prevents war instead of stroking about weaponry.
As every action invite counter reactions and it will stay that way until the others gave up for some reasons.
If the US keep projecting power snd interference upon others and to lord over others, ultimately there will be the day to face some serious challenges,
This is not about to bring down the US military but to be free from being bullied and threatened by the US.
And, the only way out is to be strong militarily thst cam keep the US at bay. I don't see anything wrong about this as it focus on keeping the US navy's fleets from closing in to strike. Hence, the possession of hylersonic missiles to defend their shores.
However, to say that these missiles by the countries who possessed are thresthening the US military is BS propagandas as the aggressors here are the US. If the US just turn away their ships and military bases, these missiles arent gonna targetting any US assets at home. Hence, no real need to counteract with new missiles unless you really have plan for attacking them.
This is talking about peace. If the US doesn't invade then no war.
I think that the border dispute with India with respect to Arunachal Pradesh, former Sth. Tibet will be the stumbling block. For 70+ decades, successive Indian leaders have convinced that it was part of the British and therefore must become Indian at Independence. The other parts of the border can be negotiated because they were undefined cartographically and wisdom will prevail, but the fact of renaming Arunachal Pradesh nearly 40 years after independence is a clear and conscious ploy to shake off its questionable uncertainty of ownership. Wiser Indian leaders in the future will have to convince it was usurped from Tibet and hence China by the presence of Tawang, in AP, which was the birthday place of the 14th Dalai Lama. The longer it takes to settle this issue, the issue of habitants in AP, will complicate the issue. Indians are highly emotional and the legacy of being a colony of Britain, has left scars in their psyche which are almost impossible to erase, except in combat when they are without a choice in defeat. The Chinese would like to avoid this, but if they in winning a war, would give part of AP back to the Indians, the vanity of the Indians could be satisfied. However, Indian leader must relent in allowing its media to advocate that India was magnanimous in correcting an injustice perpetrated by the British. I can’t see that there is another solution because from Nehru, every succeeding Indian PM, had claimed AP, being controlled by the British at the time of granting Indian independence, must become an unalienable part of the new Republic. Nagaland, has been conducting insurrection since the beginning, claiming the tribal leaders had sought British administration, not being subjugated as a British territory. And had sought its own independence a year prior but India objected this distinction. The other former states which were administered by the British as the NE Frontier, each has different status in respect of being actual subjugated colonies of Britain. Most of the inhabitants of these areas have East
Asian features and are distinctly different from Indians. Indians are intellectually very astute, but their emotional ego impedes them from making astute decisions.
Sorry but the discussions did not look into using the Art of War, Sun Zi, which the Chinese (or East) would always try to follow. Attacking Guam, Japan or any US base would meant an all-out war, which either side to win MUST eliminate other side. Almost like Israel fighting Hamas without wiping out the Palestine is tall order. And not looking into Chinese military tactics would be like expecting top martial artists to just go in head & fists first, just because got bigger fist.
I know the American approach is often quite direct (and predictable), big guns, air superiority, strategic targeting - to knock out and hope other side surrender. That's not the East Asian experience and approach, they will continue to fight... like the Japan if not for the two A-bombs.
If I refer to Sun Zi Art of War, my guess that China will start sinking some "illegal fishing boats" near the carrier fleet, 1500 - 2000 miles from the mainland coast. That will keep the American fleets out of the war. One chess piece to null entire pacific fleet. Japan (& Korea) will not want to be involved, due to the history.
What in the history of the 20-th century makes you think America would be scared off by that?
Can't help but wonder whether the CIA has a file on TP Huang.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they have a file on our humble host.
👍👍👍🇧🇷🇷🇺🇮🇳🇨🇳🇿🇦➕️👏✌️👏
It might sound counter intuitive, but TRF will probably be solved by automation. A lot of what causes TRF is the stress of work, the delayed or deferred human interaction due to intense workload. With more automation work load might start to drop on a per person basis and that would encourage more human interaction and greater birthrate. It's hard to say if they'd implement that step to lower work hours, but they are definitely going full steam ahead with automation.
Everyone who thinks about these things knows that China will make the first attack. I could ask my 12-year-old to strategize what might happen and he would come up with all of these things you assert that no one would strategizing ever think of. This is borderline silly.
I respect tp very much but I don’t think he quite thought this through
I love this audio book.
The CIS said specifically that they didn't game out China attacking American forces directly and encircling Taiwan and ignoring a full amphibious assault until Taiwan gives in. This seems like the more likely and likely to be successful scenario for China. The game they played had a direct amphibious assault. It would make more sense to avoid that from China's point of view. I think TP is right that Taiwan doesn't have the food or energy to last very long against a blockade. And if Trump wins he's already said he wouldn't fight China over Taiwan. A tragedy for Taiwan to lose its freedom.
The belligerent USA is quite capable of winning battles. But winning a war? ............Still searching my memory bank when it won one. Was it Panama or Nicaragua?
1:05:00
One area that Russians are way ahead of China is hockey.
Also want to mention so many chinese russian Marriages now
Perhaps I’ve been listening to too many think tanks but a large amount of the commentary seems over-simplified. Which is not to say some interesting ‘ground’ facts aren’t presented, just that entire and very relevant concepts aren’t integrated into conclusions. Command and control? Limitations imposed on Satellite surveillance based on orbital mechanics? Plasma sheaths on hypersonic reentry vehicles? Alliance incentives impacting China’s most successful strategy RE blockade vs invasion, poor readiness of the PLARF and US, signals intelligence… etc
The American think tank cannot be trusted....they are all mouth pcs for more military spending.
ON Taiwan ask about a Taiwan blockade instead of a direct invasion they go quiet...no answer....no response!
Why is CSIS a joke? and so many American think tanks?
This is the question
They are all mouth for military industries..."we need More...more...more "... asked about a Taiwan blockade....no answer😅
Hey Enstiens How does a Hypersonic Missle get tracking info when it is in a Plasma Blackout?
The "expert" he was interviewing was so fried. "USA has the advantage in the wargames" Absolutely laughable take.
A Chinese student in US, who happens to be a military fan to talk about China as whatever expert. Are you joking?
it seems tp has been active on these topics since 2009... is he still a student?
Yeah his takes were awful and almost 100% objectively incorrect. China being able to take out a carrier... lol? China being able to make 100 j15s a year when they have 60 in service from the start production date of 2013... lol? Can't think of a single thing he said off the top of my head that was correct.
@Robert-hy3vv your ego can't accept?
You one of those Chinese that worship white people and the West, sprinkled with a hint of inferiority and self loathing ?