America sides with Taiwan: China angry

[sun rise]

irridentism

Thanks for reminding me of that word. I had utterly forgotten it and had to look it up. It's a great and totally appropriate word for the situation.

 

[ronki23]

China's threat is a very empty. They don't have a functionnal fleet or air force to threaten an Island like Taiwan and its British and American allies. Economical sanctions are more probable and it's not like China and the CPC had any sort of jurisdiction on Taiwan.

China has enough resources to take over Taiwan and Hong Kong (Hong Kong belongs to them anyway)

 

[epronovost]

China has enough resources to take over Taiwan and Hong Kong (Hong Kong belongs to them anyway)

What your video doesn't mention in its nice round up of numbers is quality. For example, did you know both Chinese aircraft carriers are non-functionnal and the capacities of the its future air-craft carrier inferior to those of the US both in terms of speed and size? Half of its submarines are in the same situation. Later they did mentionned te greatest critical weakness of the Chinese military. It struggles to maintain a force of well trained soldiers. It's officers and core combat troops lack war experience severely and it's economical strength and internal stability will be declining in the following decades as their population age due to their one-child policy, lack immigration and local rebellious movement. If the US is a fragile and aging empire, China isn't in a remarcable position either. The hegemon of the mid 21st century will be alliance groups and Russia and China aren't solid allies.

 

[ronki23]

What your video doesn't mention in its nice round up of numbers is quality. For example, did you know both Chinese aircraft carriers are non-functionnal and the capacities of the its future air-craft carrier inferior to those of the US both in terms of speed and size? Half of its submarines are in the same situation. Later they did mentionned te greatest critical weakness of the Chinese military. It struggles to maintain a force of well trained soldiers. It's officers and core combat troops lack war experience severely and it's economical strength and internal stability will be declining in the following decades as their population age due to their one-child policy, lack immigration and local rebellious movement. If the US is a fragile and aging empire, China isn't in a remarcable position either. The hegemon of the mid 21st century will be alliance groups and Russia and China aren't solid allies.

What is India's military like in comparison to China ?

 

[epronovost]

What is India's military like in comparison to China ?

Like China it's attempting to modernise quickly and is attempting to transform itself in an institution capable of operating outside of its immediate frontier and supply chain. It suffers from a relative lack of experience, but has the benefit of support from both Russia, the French and the US in that domain making their troops more functionnal than those of China. It's also in the process of modernising heavily it's navy, training a competant special force division and a large air force. It also possess the nuclear weapon to deter any sort of large scale attack on its territory. India is probably going to maintain its economical advantages longer than China thanks to its growing population, but sectarian violence and Hindu nationalism is leading to a brain exodus toward the West from its more liberal and educated upper middle class.

 

[Twilight Hue]

China has enough resources to take over Taiwan and Hong Kong (Hong Kong belongs to them anyway)

Much to the dismay of Hong Kongers.

Its like the UK gave the chickens to the wolves.

They should have never done that.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Like China it's attempting to modernise quickly and is attempting to transform itself in an institution capable of operating outside of its immediate frontier and supply chain. It suffers from a relative lack of experience, but has the benefit of support from both Russia, the French and the US in that domain making their troops more functionnal than those of China. It's also in the process of modernising heavily it's navy, training a competant special force division and a large air force. It also possess the nuclear weapon to deter any sort of large scale attack on its territory. India is probably going to maintain its economical advantages longer than China thanks to its growing population, but sectarian violence and Hindu nationalism is leading to a brain exodus toward the West from its more liberal and educated upper middle class.

Makes me wonder if those border skirmishes are still ongoing?

 

[epronovost]

Makes me wonder if those border skirmishes are still ongoing?

It's on and off. Lately not much because of COVID, but they will certainly pick-up again. The region is completely dark too due to military control.

 

[ronki23]

What your video doesn't mention in its nice round up of numbers is quality. For example, did you know both Chinese aircraft carriers are non-functionnal and the capacities of the its future air-craft carrier inferior to those of the US both in terms of speed and size? Half of its submarines are in the same situation. Later they did mentionned te greatest critical weakness of the Chinese military. It struggles to maintain a force of well trained soldiers. It's officers and core combat troops lack war experience severely and it's economical strength and internal stability will be declining in the following decades as their population age due to their one-child policy, lack immigration and local rebellious movement. If the US is a fragile and aging empire, China isn't in a remarcable position either. The hegemon of the mid 21st century will be alliance groups and Russia and China aren't solid allies.

I know there's been one if not two generations that have retired since then but :

a) The military of China's Communist Party managed to unify China from its civil war against the Kuomintang
b) China has managed to keep a hold of Tibet and Xinjiang
c) India has had three wars with Pakistan
d) India pushed back China in 1967

So I'd hardly say these are inexperienced militaries.

 

[epronovost]

I know there's been one if not two generations that have retired since then but :

a) The military of China's Communist Party managed to unify China from its civil war against the Kuomintang
b) China has managed to keep a hold of Tibet and Xinjiang
c) India has had three wars with Pakistan
d) India pushed back China in 1967

So I'd hardly say these are inexperienced militaries.

That was 50 years ago. An average hihg ranking officer is about 50 to 70. Some of them were not even born during this time. These officers retired decades ago. The rank and file wasn't born yet and younger mid level officers are about 30-40 years old and were too young to participate in such encounters. There has been no open war in Tibet and Xinjiang, only police repression. Neither country participated in more than a few skirmishes and peace mission since the 80's. War as also changed dramatically since the 70's both in terms of equipment, but also of tactics. When it comes down to troop level where soldiers are between 20-30, you don't even have a core of veteran while the US elite troops for example can claim to hav participated in operations in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Mali. That's a huge difference. Many of the Chinese and Indian troops are "parade trained" not "field trained" let alone bloodied.

 

[ronki23]

That was 50 years ago. An average hihg ranking officer is about 50 to 70. Some of them were not even born during this time. These officers retired decades ago. The rank and file wasn't born yet and younger mid level officers are about 30-40 years old and were too young to participate in such encounters. There has been no open war in Tibet and Xinjiang, only police repression. Neither country participated in more than a few skirmishes and peace mission since the 80's. War as also changed dramatically since the 70's both in terms of equipment, but also of tactics. When it comes down to troop level where soldiers are between 20-30, you don't even have a core of veteran while the US elite troops for example can claim to hav participated in operations in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Mali. That's a huge difference. Many of the Chinese and Indian troops are "parade trained" not "field trained" let alone bloodied.

Apologies for the late reply but surely China's war veterans would have handed down strategies and tactics ?

As for India, many soldiers from the Kargil and Siachen conflicts with Pakistan are now higher up in the military

 

[epronovost]

Apologies for the late reply but surely China's war veterans would have handed down strategies and tactics ?

Certainly, but at the moment the people handing down strategies and tactics have themselves never been in combat or participated in a large scale conflict. There is also a big difference between being trained by someone with experience and having experience yourself, something that a significant number of members of US elite combat units can claim, but that almost no chinese soldier can and even fewer officers. China is actually trying to flex its muscle by getting more involved in peacekeeping and anti-terrorist mission in Eatern Africa both to get experience in military operation and increase the international prestige and influence of China.

As for India, many soldiers from the Kargil and Siachen conflicts with Pakistan are now higher up in the military

That's indeed correct, hence why India's military, while more poorly equipped than the Chinese one at the moment has more officers with genuine experience. Note that during the Kargil war though, both Pakistan and India were using antiquated equipment at the time. India was still relyingg on the MiG-21 for air support, an aircraft that was designed in 1955 with its golden years in the mid 60's. Training its soldiers and officers in modern warfare with proper equipment like drone support, special tactic operation, modern aircrafts and cybersecurity is currently a challenge.

 

[ronki23]

Certainly, but at the moment the people handing down strategies and tactics have themselves never been in combat or participated in a large scale conflict. There is also a big difference between being trained by someone with experience and having experience yourself, something that a significant number of members of US elite combat units can claim, but that almost no chinese soldier can and even fewer officers. China is actually trying to flex its muscle by getting more involved in peacekeeping and anti-terrorist mission in Eatern Africa both to get experience in military operation and increase the international prestige and influence of China.



That's indeed correct, hence why India's military, while more poorly equipped than the Chinese one at the moment has more officers with genuine experience. Note that during the Kargil war though, both Pakistan and India were using antiquated equipment at the time. India was still relyingg on the MiG-21 for air support, an aircraft that was designed in 1955 with its golden years in the mid 60's. Training its soldiers and officers in modern warfare with proper equipment like drone support, special tactic operation, modern aircrafts and cybersecurity is currently a challenge.

Late reply but why did India have such difficulty dealing with 10 terrorists with AK-47s when they attacked Mumbai in 2008 ? They had to wait for assistance from Delhi despite having a huge military and numerous victories such as Kargil, Bangladesh, Sikkim, Nathu-La and Chola

 

[epronovost]

Late reply but why did India have such difficulty dealing with 8 Pakistanis with AK-47s when they attacked Mumbai in 2008 ? They had to wait for assistance from Delhi despite having a huge military and numerous wars such as Kargil, Bangladesh, Sikkim, Nathu-La and Chola

India is notorious for being a chaotic mess of a country. It wasn't a military intervention either. At that point it's a high risk police operation.

 

[ronki23]

India is notorious for being a chaotic mess of a country. It wasn't a military intervention either. At that point it's a high risk police operation.

So India lacks police training and China lacks military experience?

Why don't law enforcement and military ever train together?

 

[epronovost]

So India lacks police training and China lacks military experience?

Basically. Unlike India, China is a police State too.

Why don't law enforcement and military ever train together?

Because they are two fundamentally different jobs. The only point in common is that they both have the right to commit acts of violence toward other humans under certain circumstances and they use firearms (though usually not the same).

 

[ronki23]

Here's a video update: Taiwan's military is on orange alert

 

[Revoltingest]

Some encouraging news....
China Tensions Spill Over as Europe Moves Toward Biden’s Side
Excerpted....
A major investment deal reached in December between the European Union and China — after seven years of painful negotiations — may end up being the high-water mark for ties that are quickly deteriorating again.

Since then, the EU’s executive branch and Germany have each formulated legislation that would make life harder for Chinese entities to invest, while joining the U.S. in swapping tit-for-tat sanctions with Beijing. Italy’s government has turned from an enthusiastic backer of President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative to blocking planned acquisitions by Chinese companies. And in France, China’s ambassador didn’t even show up when summoned in March, citing “agenda reasons.”

Taken together, the moves signal a hardening of the European stance on Beijing. And the biggest shift could be yet to come, with polls showing the German Greens party on course for a significant role in government after September’s election, raising the prospect of a more China-skeptic chill from Europe’s biggest economy.

 

[Wu Wei]

Some encouraging news....
China Tensions Spill Over as Europe Moves Toward Biden’s Side
Excerpted....
A major investment deal reached in December between the European Union and China — after seven years of painful negotiations — may end up being the high-water mark for ties that are quickly deteriorating again.

Since then, the EU’s executive branch and Germany have each formulated legislation that would make life harder for Chinese entities to invest, while joining the U.S. in swapping tit-for-tat sanctions with Beijing. Italy’s government has turned from an enthusiastic backer of President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative to blocking planned acquisitions by Chinese companies. And in France, China’s ambassador didn’t even show up when summoned in March, citing “agenda reasons.”

Taken together, the moves signal a hardening of the European stance on Beijing. And the biggest shift could be yet to come, with polls showing the German Greens party on course for a significant role in government after September’s election, raising the prospect of a more China-skeptic chill from Europe’s biggest economy.

UK carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth to visit Japan and South Korea

 

[Audie]

Much to the dismay of Hong Kongers.

Its like the UK gave the chickens to the wolves.

They should have never done that.

We'd have preferred to stick with Britain but
it's not like there was some choice for the British. Or HK.