The only quibble I have with that reporting is that I have always understood that both of us have long penetrated each other's systems in a way that can be activated in the event of conflict. One thing about a cyberwar with China is that they are also vulnerable. Russia less so, so they have less fear of reciprocal attacks. But we are the most vulnerable. I have read open source that we have done a lot of "hardening" and "cleaning" over the last decade and are not as vulnerable as we once were. Hopefully that will never be tested. In both fictional imaginings I have read about a US China War - Ghost Fleet and 2034, China disabled our forces via cyber at the outset.
A very informational article about the difficulties China would have of sinking an aircraft carrier with hypersonic missiles. The first big problem is finding the aircraft carrier in a massive ocean. A Hawkeye surveillance plane flies above the carrier at all times, and gets fighters airborne whenever an enemy recon plane is nearby to shoo them away before they see too much. Satellites are not much use, as they only take a very small picture of the ocean, and radar satellites require too much energy to be practical (Russia had nuclear-powered satellites, but they were unreliable). The Aegis system missiles are about as good or better than Patriot missiles. One thing that the article doesn't seem to mention is that it is generally believed to take about five direct hits from missiles or large bombs to sink an aircraft carrier. The other thing that would make it difficult is the top speed of an aircraft carrier (allegedly about 50+ knots, or more than 55 mph). If China sent out fighter jets behind its recon planes and kept the U.S. fighter jets busy while the hypersonic missiles were launched, the carrier would retreat rapidly and be somewhere else when the missiles arrived. No, Chinese hypersonic missiles have not made US aircraft carriers obsolete
A California professor argues that China's economy will never catch up to the U.S. under Xi Jinping's militaristic regime. The investments in the military (and U.S. restrictions on dealing with China) will be a drain on each economy, but China will suffer much more. Foreign companies are less willing to invest in China, between China's preparations to invade Taiwan and new attitudes and rules on foreigners in China. China has less access to U.S. technology. And China simply has not been able to recover from Covid like the U.S. has. China's rate of growth will likely continue to be higher than the U.S. in the short term, but not enough for them to catch up. China won't catch up to the US economy because Xi Jinping's obsession with security will sabotage growth, professor says
No doubt this is the battleground for wars to come. Deploy an EMP on the East Coast of USA while hacking military com in the Pacific and the CCP will be in Taiwan before you can access your Facebook feed - without a shot being fired.
I remember the fear of Japan surpassing the American economy. Crichton wrote a book and it became a movie. Rising Sun was its name maybe. China has many issues that they aren’t addressing if they want to overtake the US economy.
China tries to silence the Falun Gong movement in the U.S. by bribing a U.S. tax official to revoke their tax-exempt status. Apparently the reputation of U.S. government officials is so poor internationally that China thought that $5,000 was a reasonable bribe. It turns out the taxman was an undercover federal agent. US accuses two of bribing IRS in anti-Falun Gong plot
Somewhere 100s of posts back I posted a link to a short book on this called Carrier Killer. Good read
China's comedy scene dies an almost instantaneous death because of one joke about two dogs and a squirrel. Entertainment groups in China are terrified to offend the Communist Party with any more jokes that might offend them, so comedy has basically been banned in China. Sounds like something Hitler or Stalin might do. Chinese comedy group punishment sends chills through arts sphere
The kill chain (locating the CVN, guiding a missile to it, evade/overwhelm defenses, strike target accurately) for a long range strike on a carrier group can be disrupted at many steps, but the true threat of long range strikes by hypersonic missiles or ASBMs isn't really that they can sink carriers. The reason is because the kill chain becomes a lot harder to disrupt the shorter the range is. Having such weapons will force our CBGs to operate farther away from the battlefield, which reduces their effectiveness. Then there's also the matter of cost-effectiveness. Reportedly the Chinese hypersonic gliders are quite cheap and they're making hundreds a year, whereas each SM or PAC3 missile costs a few million dollars. Our SOP is usually to fire 2 missiles for each incoming threat. You see how that can be a problem if war breaks out, especially given China's industrial capacity.
Chinese comedian arrested for joking about the military. American internet troll arrested for posting memes deemed racist. Pastor in Canada’s most conservative province still imprisoned for holding church services during pan-panic. There are no heroic nations. There are only heroes. And too few of those.
Wuhan nears bankruptcy as China has racked up debts of $18 trillion. Wuhan is trying to collect $14 million, which isn't a lot of money for a large city, from businesses. The fact that they have to take this step, and do it publicly, indicates that their debt problem is fairly serious. China is slashing benefits to seniors and considering cuts to other vital services. One of China's biggest cities is so cash-strapped it's calling in debts | CNN Business
Experts on China believe that it is highly likely that China does not want its currency to replace the U.S. dollar in international trade. 3 reasons why even China doesn't want the yuan to replace the dollar as the world's reserve currency Here are three reasons: By limiting the flow of yuan into and out of the country, their currency is more stable than it otherwise would be. And China does like to control things. There is more foreign demand for dollars than U.S. demand for imports. This could leave the U.S. vulnerable to shifts in global capital flows. China's central bank would have to hold massive amounts of yuan-based bonds, which the U.S. Fed does with Treasury securities.
This man gets my vote for craziest human being on the planet … TIME TO 'UP OUR GAME': Graham Says Increase U.S. Military Strength NOW or Face War With China [WATCH]
You're confounding two concepts. Trade currency and reserve currency are not the same thing. China is in fact already quite far along in advancing the Yuan in international trades, starting with their own. About half of China's cross-border transactions is now conducted in Yuan. The article is correct however that China does not want the Yuan to replace the dollar as the reserve currency. It's share globally as a reserve currency will naturally rise as countries need to stock up on Yuan to trade with China and increasingly, with each other as well, but that's just a side effect of China's push to advance the Yuan's role in international trade. All the reasons listed in the article are pretty legitimate as to why China doesn't actually want the Yuan to be the premier reserve currency of the world. With that said, China also doesn't want the dollar to be the dominant international reserve currency. So on that front they'll be pushing for a multipolar solution, where a basket of currencies make up the bulk of sovereign reserves rather than one currency.
Interesting interview with Orville Schell on the psychological DNA of Chinese leadership and larger society But nonetheless, Jiang Zemin brought them back again to some degree — so that by the time he left power, it was relatively hopeful that engagement and the global compact with China involved might still go forward. And then we got this period of ambiguity under Hu Jintao. You’ve got him claiming the South China Sea. And remember this idea of “core interest” 核心利益, which was stuff that you can’t negotiate: the South China Sea, Tibet, Xinjiang, other border regions. And that’s when things started hardening up. [Ed. For example, in a speech given in Washington, DC, on January 20, 2011, Hu Jintao made five proposals for “healthier and more stable Sino-US relations,” the last of which was for the US to respect China’s “core interests”; there he specifically mentioned Taiwan and Tibet.] And then along came Xi Jinping and this whole idea of a national rejuvenation and the China dream. It really froze things into a very rigid “us and them” posture, where the forces that had been latent of a hostile West in opposition to China came back with a vengeance. And that was the sad, tragic ending of engagement. And in my view, whatever successes China has had — which are not inconsiderable and must be acknowledged — there’s an immense tragedy building here, because China has been so successful: it’s accomplished what it could not accomplish for a century — which is to become a modern, wealthy, powerful country. And Xi Jinping is now threatening to undermine all of that with an absolutely senseless provocation of all the countries around him. It makes it very difficult for them to collaborate, and for “peaceful rise” or “peaceful development” to become the hour of the day. Instead, we have “wolf-warrior diplomacy” 戰狼外交, and we have blocs dividing like oil and water. Schell on US-China: Engagement, Tragedy, and Penetrating the Veil
