Taiwan Strait Balance of Forces

From DoD (November 2021):

Source: DoD, Annual Report to Congress on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China (PRC), November 3, 2021.

Source: DoD, Annual Report to Congress on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China (PRC), November 3, 2021.

Source: DoD, Annual Report to Congress on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China (PRC), November 3, 2021.

Source: DoD, Annual Report to Congress on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China (PRC), November 3, 2021. Appendix I.

Source: DoD, Annual Report to Congress on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China (PRC), November 3, 2021. Appendix I.

Source: DoD, Annual Report to Congress on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China (PRC), November 3, 2021. Appendix. 

See this post for discussion of wargaming exercises, regarding various scenarios for conflict.

133 thoughts on “Taiwan Strait Balance of Forces

  1. UnlikelyToBeEconned

    Off topic,
    So Menzie Doesn’t Think South China Sea Is In a Recession as of November 2021?

  2. 2slugbaits

    So here’s the elephant in the room that no one wants to talk about: Taiwan has three operational nuclear power plants and over 100,000 barrels of nuclear waste. How many weeks would it take a technologically advanced country like Taiwan to build an arsenal of dirty bombs if it perceived a military invasion from the PRC was imminent?

    1. David O'Rear

      In which military strategy book would you expect to find a geographically small nation — one that would be blanketed by two or three bombs — using such weapons against a geographically huge nation, say one that couldn’t be blanketed by fewer than a thousand bombs?

      It is very reassuring that no one really thinks through nuclear warfighting; it means we don’t think it is a real thing, and that’s good.

      1. pgl

        North Korea is developing nukes and the capacity to fire them at the US. Yea I get if Kimmie did this – he would be dead within the week.

      2. 2slugbaits

        David O’Rear I don’t think they would be used strategically against actual Chinese territory, just invading Chinese personnel. More likely as a complicating tactical factor against invading forces offshore; e.g., dirty landmines, low yield artillery rounds, etc. The point is that Taiwan could make a credible threat that would inhibit any invasion. President Xi would have to think twice before launching an invasion.

        1. Moses Herzog

          Taiwan destroying their own computer chip manufacturing sector is something I saw suggested in a military authored paper that I thought was very interesting. It would cause global impact. I probably have the paper or link saved on my comp but would take forever to find it. If I searched hard enough I might still find the online version. I still think it’s a unique and viable idea.

    2. Anonymous

      what would these dirty bombs look like

      barrel bombs like Assad used?

      dominant winds are east to west in north hemisphere so unless they go hundreds of miles east the radiation plume comes their way

  3. ltr

    https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2021/human-and-budgetary-costs-date-us-war-afghanistan-2001-2022

    August, 2021

    Budgetary Costs to Date of the U.S. War in Afghanistan, 2001-2022
    By Neta C. Crawford and Catherine Lutz

    Estimated Congressional Appropriations and Spending in Current Billions of U.S. Dollars, Excluding Future Interest Payments and Future Costs for Veterans Care

    Total FY2001-FY2022

    Defense Department Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) (War) Budget ( $1,055 * )
    State Department OCO (War) Budget ( $60)
    Defense Department Base Budget War-Related Increases ( $433)
    Veterans Care for Afghan War Vets to Date ( $233)
    Estimated Interest on War Borrowing ( $532)

    TOTAL ( $2,313)

    * Billions of Current Dollars

    Since invading Afghanistan in 2001, the United States has spent $2.313 trillion on the war, which includes operations in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. Note that this total does not include funds that the United States government is obligated to spend on lifetime care for American veterans of this war, nor does it include future interest payments on money borrowed to fund the war.

    1. Macroduck

      Wow! This is pathetic!

      ltr is the Queen of off-topic comments, flooding the Econbrowser comments section with repetitious irrelevant comments despite numerous requests from our host to stop. Bad manners.

      This, though, is something different. This is pure what-about-ism. “Oh, yeah, well what about…”

      Clearly, ltr’s masters do not want us thinking about China’s plans to go to war with Taiwan. Bit of a tactical mistake here, though. Instead of her usual “Oh, look! Chinese unicorns!” ltr has gone with “Oh yeah! Well what about…” Instead of trying to distract us, she’s decided to reveal that a nerve has been struck. Funny.

      1. pgl

        She is one of the gang of four. The other three stooges: JohnH, Bruce Hall, and Princeton Steve. I wish all four would find another blog to pollute.

        1. Moses Herzog

          Hahaha, I mean one side of me likes this “gang of four” abbreviation of our bad actors. Another side of me says “Gang of Four” were fall guys for Mao’s intentional destruction of civilized society. So….. I think our 4 here on the blog are committing their own crimes. There’s no true puppetmaster hiding backstage doing the invalid schtick.

          1. pgl

            OK – the gang of 5. Actually ltr on occasion comes through with some real contributions. None of the other 4 ever do.

          2. Moses Herzog

            @ pgl
            Barkley mainly wants you to soft-stroke the back of Kopits’s hair, give him some tingles, and say “Kopits, we know you put graffiti all over the high school building’s walls and vandalized both the science lab and the computer lab, but underneath it all, we know you’re a good boy, because you flatter Barkley at the appropriate moments. Calm down Kopits, Barkley has your ADHD pills, and Barkley is going to take you to the state fair for Fried Twinkies and corndogs later.”

          3. Barkley Rosser

            Actually, Moses, I consiser CoRev to be worse than Bruce Hal, ltr, and Kopits. He is really the pits. Only the truly evil JohnH is worse than CoRev in my book.

            And in my book, you are also worse than several of these. But that is my own personal take, given your sick obsession with constantly lying about me every other time you post here.

  4. ltr

    https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2021/Costs%20of%20War_U.S.%20Budgetary%20Costs%20of%20Post-9%2011%20Wars_9.1.21.pdf

    September 1, 2021

    Estimated Costs of Post 9-11 Wars, FY2001 – FY2022 and Future Veterans’ Costs
    By Neta C. Crawford

    Appropriations Department of Defense (including $42 billion request for FY2022)   ( $2,101 * )
    State Department/USAID (including $8 billion appropriation for FY2022)   ( $189)
    Interest on Borrowing for DOD and State Department Overseas
    Contingency Operations Spending   ( $1,087)

    Increases to DOD Base Budget Due to Post 9-11 Wars   ( $884)
    Post-9/11 Veterans’ Medical and Disability through FY2022   ( $465)
    Homeland Security Prevention and Response to Terrorism   ( $1,117)

    Total War Appropriations and War-Related Spending through FY2022   ( $5,843)

    Estimated Future Obligations for Veterans Medical and Disability, FY2023 – FY2050   ( c. $2,200)

    Total War-Related Spending through FY2022 and Estimated Obligations for Veterans’ Care through 2050   ( $8,043)

    * Billions of Current Dollars, Rounded to Nearest Billion

    1. AndrewG

      Won’t China’s veteran health care bill go up dramatically if China attacks Taiwan? It could be very bloody – for China. Just something to think about.

    2. JohnH

      ltr should be interested in this: “ China forgives debt for 17 African nations.” Straight out of Michael Hudson.
      https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/china-forgives-debt-for-17-african-nations/news-story/28ab7f45440142634ff8efd0360b2fec

      Now compare that to the US/iMF neoliberal response to nations that couldn’t pay their debts: austerity, rescheduling the debt, gutting worker protections, and selling off the countries’ Crown Jewels to Wall Street vultures for pennies on the dollar.

      Which approach do you think foreign countries would prefer?

      Methinks it’s a public relations coup for China and will undermine any hope the US has of having “the world” take the its side in future spats with China. Many of those nations already refuse to side with Uncle Sam on Ukraine. It’s looking more and more like a multipolar world…

      1. AndrewG

        “Which approach do you think foreign countries would prefer?”

        The ones that are good for their debt would rather pay it. It’s a good sign for future borrowing. Those are also the ones that have their ‘ish together and are growing. China can keep the laggards as allies. I’m sure they’ll come in handy at the UN when China kills a bunch of people in a futile invasion of democratic Taiwan which you will invariably support. “Alleged.”

        1. pgl

          Pay no attention to JohnH. He may be the most dishonest troll here. Yea even worse than the RICK, CoRev, Bruce Hall, and Princeton Steve combined.

        2. JohnH

          A lot of middle income countries have suffered enormously under the IMF/US’ Washington Consensus draconian deform packages. Far from being laggards the list includes many large economies that the US would love to have on its side. I’m sure they would prefer an alternate lender who was more interested in reasonable terms and less interested in furthering Wall Street exploitation.

          1. pgl

            “I’m sure they would prefer an alternate lender who was more interested in reasonable terms and less interested in furthering Wall Street exploitation.”

            All yes – the canard that all lending goes through Wall Street. You are … are an idiot. Ever heard of Money Tree?

      2. pgl

        Putin may be get jealous that you are now shilling for Xi. Man you love murderous tyrants! BTW – how does your MAGA hat fit on your little brain?

      3. pgl

        ““China will waive the 23 interest-free loans for 17 African countries that had matured by the end of 2021,” Mr Wang said at the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation according to a statement. He pledged that China would continue to actively support and participate in the construction of major infrastructure projects in Africa through financing, investment and assistance. “We will also continue to increase imports from Africa, support the greater development of Africa’s agricultural and manufacturing sectors, and expand co-operation in emerging industries such as the digital economy, health, green and low-carbon sectors.” Mr Wang also pledged that China would provide food assistance to the 17 African nations.

        I get you flunked Finance 101 but interest free is not the same thing as debt forgiveness. Especially in a world of low interest rates. Heck market rates for German government bonds have been negative for much of the last decade. But the principle must be repaid so it is not debt forgiveness.

        Secondly if you think the US has never subsidized foreign loans, you are indeed a moron. More trade, assistance with food, infrastructure in other nations? The US has done this for generations. Now I would give Xi a little praise here but your insistence that the US never does this only proves what an utter liar and/or moron you really are.

        1. JohnH

          If could read, pgl, you would see that China forgave the loans.

          And, yes, I’m sure the US has offered low interest rate loans, but IMF bailouts were essentially punitive, and the people of some of the countries (Russia, Venezuela, Argentina) have never forgiven the US for the hardship that the US imposed upon them. What worked for your Wall Street buddies back in the days of hegemony does not make friends in a multipolar world.

          1. pgl

            “If could read, pgl, you would see that China forgave the loans.”

            That was the headline. You clearly did not read the text. This is so typical of you. Read someone dumbass headline and never bothering to read the entire article.

          2. pgl

            “IMF bailouts were essentially punitive”

            You claimed in corporate America. When your pathetic Fortune 200 company defaulted on its loans, did the banks throw your CFO a party? Probably not – as they decide to force your incompetently run company into bankruptcy. Nothing against your CFO but he did hire you which had to be the worst decision ever.

          3. pgl

            You read only the headline as usual. I read the entire discussion. You might want to try that some time. BTW – I do not hang out at Wall Street. I guess you need a map as Brooklyn is not Wall Street.

  5. dilbert dogbert

    I assume China would use the Russian tactics of massive civilian terror. Plus some of America’s air defense suppression. Taiwan’s population faces China.
    Not fun to think about.

    1. AndrewG

      I don’t know the history myself, but I think we’d have to look at China’s recent imperialist history to get some clues. The conquest of mainland China, then Tibet and the west. I suspect it’s not a good look.

    2. David O'Rear

      No, certainly not fun to think about, and I hope no one here gets that impression.

      I suspect there is a lot of thinking going on about pre-positioning some serious anti-air, anti-ship, and ASW capabilities in Taiwan.
      It isn’t necessary to trot it out for inspection just yet (that would be provocative), but some training “near by” (Taiwan army has practiced parachuting into Malaysia in the past) might get the operators up to speed in time to provide something of a very nasty surprise to the poorly experienced PLAN and PLAAF.

  6. ltr

    https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=19&step=3&isuri=1&select_all_years=0&nipa_table_list=5&series=q&1=5&2=2007&3=2018&4=q&5=x&first_year=2020&6=0&7=survey&last_year=2022&scale=-9

    July 28, 2022

    Defense spending was 58.6% of federal government consumption and investment in April through June 2022. *

    $925.1 / $1,578.2 = 58.6%

    Defense spending was 21.5% of all government consumption and investment in April through June 2022.

    $925.1 / $4,295.9 = 21.5%

    Defense spending was 3.7% of GDP in April through June 2022.

    $925.1 / $24,851.8 = 3.7%

    * Billions of dollars

    1. AndrewG

      Hey, aren’t you worried about China’s rising military spending? You don’t seem to mention that much.

      1. Anonymous

        I have not check recently on China, but a few years ago China was increasing its military trough about same as growth in gdp.

        the pentagon trough has maintained real us$ spending about equal to the real dollars in the Reagan build up.

        the image of us disarmament is reflected in the decline of the pentagon trough to gdp, and entitlement rising.

        pentagon part of usa discretionary spending holds its own

        while buying f-35 and ford class aircraft carriers is expensive disarmament

        for Pete sake the f-35 already needs a new engine and it has not been through operational test

      2. pgl

        ltr has been told many times that these ratios are highly misleading. Yes nondefense Federal purchases are low relative to defense purchases. But that is because the state and local governments here do the education, police and hire, and much of the transportation purchases. If she were honest, she would do defense purchases as a percent of all government purchases.

        But she routinely does not. By now it cannot be an omission since we have raised this many times. Now I hate to call her a liar as some of what she posts is spot on. But this is absurd.

    2. JohnH

      The GAO has never audited the “Defense” Department, so no one really knows how the money is being spent. Yet Congress keeps increasing their budgets with little regard to whether the money is well spent.The F35 is a prime example: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/12/opinion/f-35-fighter-jet-cost.html

      Of course, the DOD is no stranger to pouring money down ratholes, Ukraine being the latest instance. If anything, Ukraine should clearly demonstrate that the US’ peer competitors get a lot more bang for their military spending and that throwing money at an unaudited , bloated bureaucracy might not get you any results other than more pointless and futile wars.

      1. AndrewG

        JohnH, you put scare quotes on “Defense” Department with the same zeal with which you put them on “war crimes” (at least when Russia does them).

      2. pgl

        The GAO has never audited the Defense Department? You do lie a lot. Try Googling as one can find lots of things like this:

        https://www.gao.gov/products/pad-78-34

        Oh wait – you were the clown who parroted Rand Paul’s claim that the Federal Reserve is not audited even though even 5 year olds can find their income statement and balance sheets.

        Come on Johnny boy – I know the MAGA hat trolls here love to lie but do you really want to be the head right wing troll here?

      3. JohnH

        pgl needs to stop embarrassing himself. The guy is so ill-informed that it boggled the imagination!

        “The Pentagon Has Never Passed An Audit. Some Senators Want To Change That…

        When the Pentagon launched its first-ever independent financial audit back in 2017, backers of accountability in government welcomed it as a major step for a department with a track record of financial boondoggles.

        But the Defense Department failed that audit – and the next two as well. Now lawmakers are introducing a bipartisan bill that would impose a penalty for any part of the department, including the military, that fails to undergo a “clean” audit.

        “The Pentagon and the military industrial complex have been plagued by a massive amount of waste, fraud and financial mismanagement for decades. That is absolutely unacceptable,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who co-sponsored the bill with Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, along with Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Mike Lee, R-Utah.”
        https://www.npr.org/2021/05/19/997961646/the-pentagon-has-never-passed-an-audit-some-senators-want-to-change-that

        1. pgl

          Did you flunk preK reading?

          ‘When the Pentagon launched its first-ever independent financial audit back in 2017, backers of accountability in government welcomed it as a major step for a department with a track record of financial boondoggles. But the Defense Department failed that audit – and the next two as well.’

          Your own link notes they were audited. Now did I say they passed these audits? Of course not. Now if you think an audit that exposes certain problems means no audit ever occurred then you sir are the dumbest troll God ever invented.

          1. JohnH

            Oh my. My statement needs correction. DOD never PASSED an audit.

            But pgl thinks that’s fine…just keep pouring money down that rathole.

          2. pgl

            “JohnH
            August 24, 2022 at 10:58 am
            Oh my. My statement needs correction. DOD never PASSED an audit.

            But pgl thinks that’s fine…just keep pouring money down that rathole.”

            Another one of your little temper tantrum. First of all I have always advocated reducing defense spending and you know that. But WHAAAA WHAAA WHAAA, baby boy Johnny got his feeling hurt. WHAAA WHAAAA WHAAA!

        2. AndrewG

          “The guy is so ill-informed that it boggled the imagination!”

          You’re the guy who thinks IMF loans = Wall Street exploitation.

      4. Noneconomist

        Hey John: why not just go all “ Animal Farm” and save space?
        USA …Baaaaaad. Ukraine….Baaaad. Media…Baaaad Economists…Baaaad
        Russia…Gooood. China…Gooood. Consummate Insiders…;Gooooood Anybody praising Russia, China, Venezuela, Syria…Gooooooood
        See, you save space and you don’t have to hide your hatred of the US and, better, you don’t keep repeating the same lies that have most posters here laughing at your “sources” and their nonexistent expertise.
        You’re a joke. A fraud. You know it. You just repeat the same tired propaganda over and over and over again.But you’re afforded space to continue your Putinesque cheerleading.
        Pathetic.But, golly, what’s the latest from one of your consummate insiders? Russia…..Goooood? Who knew!

      5. Barkley Rosser

        JohnH,

        There certainly is a lot of wasteful spending at DOD. But your comments about how DOD is sending money/arms “down a rathole” in connection with Ukraine show you up once again as supporting war crimes of Putin’s invasion as bad as Hitler’s invasion of his neighbors in WW II. You are just a stinking fascist of the worst sort, utterly disgusting, the worst commentator here, pure evil.

        1. pgl

          Could someone buy JohnH a kindergarten reading book. He claims no audit ever occurred but his own link says audits have been done. Yea DoD may not have “passed” the audit but that does not mean no audit occurred.

          You are correct that this troll is an apologist for Putin war crimes. But it also seems based on his own stupid writing his reading skills are on par with a 2 year old.

        2. JohnH

          Barkley: the definition of rathole–“Something into which seemingly endless amounts of resources, usually money, can be wasted.”

          Great example of a rathole: pointless and futile wars–Washington’s specialty for the past 70 years.

          Definition of crazy–doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Given the band of DC idiots who can’t shoot straight, why should Ukraine turn out any differently?

          Being a lifelong cold warrior, you are naturally obsessed with Russia and committed to defeating the evil empire. But you might stop and reflect upon whether the US can actually do it, given its repeated inability to defeat even poorly armed foes like the Taliban.

          Instead of pouring yet more $billion down the rathole, won’t you really prefer to spend the money in place that really need it…like American universities?

          1. Barkley Rosser

            JohnH,’

            I get it that you actrually so not know scheiss about me. But then, you are an utterly immoral creep, so not surprising you just shoot your mout off with ignorant and foolish lies.

            Regarding ratholes, I agree that the US has put money and much else down ratholes over the years. I have, as noted here repeatedly, opposed many of the wars the US has fought in the past including several of those you like to list.

            But Ukraine does not look like a rathole at all. Indeed, it looks that US aid, especially the HIMARS, have turned the war around. Russian forces appear to be pretty much completely stalled out on all fronts now. Maybe Ukraine is not going to be able to reconquer Kherson or an y of the other major locations the Russians have conquered, but it also looks that Russia is not going to conquer anything else, stalled out in the face of the Urkainians armed by the uS and allies. Heck, that slow crawl towards Bakhmut looks to have now halted. They are not even gaining there anymore, the one place they could be said to be crawling foreard kilometer by kilometer as claimed by that German general you had quoted by that Indian diplomat you like who pops up on the Russian propaganda outlet you like to quote.

          2. Barkley Rosser

            JohnH,

            You are just annoyed that I have your number hard and cold: that you exhibit unmitigated pure evil, and you do here, over and over.

  7. ltr

    https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/files/cow/imce/papers/2021/Costs%20of%20War_Bilmes_Long-Term%20Costs%20of%20Care%20for%20Vets_Aug%202021.pdf

    August 18, 2021

    The Long-Term Costs of United States Care for Veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars
    By Linda J. Bilmes

    Summary

    Between 2001 and 2050, the total costs of caring for veterans of the post-9/11 wars are estimated to reach between $2.2 and $2.5 trillion. This includes the amount already paid in disability and related benefits and medical care, as well as the projected future cost of lifetime disability benefits and health care for those who have served in the military during these wars. This estimate is double the author’s previous projections in 2011 and 2013. Several factors account for this dramatic increase. These include: extraordinarily high rates of disabilities among this cohort of veterans, greater outreach by the federal government to inform veterans of their eligibility for benefits, more generous eligibility and benefit compensation, as well as more advanced and expensive medical care, and substantial investment by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to process and administer claims and benefit programs and deliver health care. Federal expenditures to care for veterans doubled from 2.4 percent of the U.S. budget in FY 2001 to 4.9 percent * in FY 2020, even as the total number of living veterans from all U.S. wars declined from 25.3 million to 18.5 million.

    * 4.9 percent of 6.6 trillion dollars = 323.4 billion dollars

    Yet the majority of the costs associated with caring for post-9/11 veterans has not yet been paid and will continue to accrue long into the future. As in earlier U.S. wars, the costs of care and benefits for post-9/11 veterans will not reach their peak until decades after the conflict, as veterans’ needs increase with age. This time around, veterans’ costs will be much steeper. More than 40 percent of the troops who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan and related locations have already been approved to receive lifetime disability benefits.

    Linda J. Bilmes is the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Chair in Public Policy and Public Finance at the Kennedy School, Harvard University.

    1. AndrewG

      Yes, remember, China has no veteran health care costs, ever. America bad, China SO awesome. And it’s not like China is planning a sure-to-be bloody regime change on some island or anything.

  8. David O'Rear

    As we have seen in Ukraine this year, the numbers in the DOD’s comparative tables mean a whole lot less than we used to think. In particular, I’d draw attention to the ridiculous inclusion of a comparison of total ground forces on either side of the Taiwan Strait. As long as the PLA’s ground forces – which includes their armor – are on the Western side of the Strait, they are of little use in a conflict with Taiwan.

    Then there’s quality, as in submarine quality vis-a-vis the US Navy. The boomers might launch (hey, if we’re going nuclear the whole thing is moot), but the diesel electric hunter-killers are quite noisy. As in, easily detected and killed.

    1. Steven Kopits

      The US will cut off China’s oil supply. Full stop. You will see a replay of Japan’s strategy as a result. If you’re China, and you want to see how it will play, that’s your playbook.

      Now, Japan actually has reasons to do what it did, notably, the collapse of the silk trade in the Great Depression and the devastating effects of Smoot Hawley on the Japanese economy. So the Japanese took a crack at Manchuria and Korea, and gradually earned themselves a series of sanctions from the US, including notably one on oil imports. And from there, the Japanese basically needed to conquer SE Asia to secure their oil and other commodities.

      The turning point, however, was not Pearl Harbor, or even the US oil sanctions. It was the decision to invade Manchuria and Korea. That set the wheels in motion, ending in the Pacific War.

      For China, the Manchuria equivalent is Taiwan. So the decision is not to invade Taiwan, it’s to invade Iraq, because China will have to fight it all the way back there, sooner or later.

      That’s absolutely insane. China is not under pressure to do any of this, other than to assuage Xi’s fragile ego.

      1. pgl

        “The US will cut off China’s oil supply.”

        My God – you cannot even get the oil and natural gas sector right even if you claim to be the expert energy consultant of all time.

        The US is not nearly the major player in terms of exporting oil to China. The Chinese could turn to countries like Russia, Saudi Arabia, other Middle East players, Australia, and even Latin America players. Wait – I guess you have no clue what these other oil exporters even are.

      2. pgl

        It took me 2 seconds to find this informative cite:

        https://www.worldstopexports.com/top-15-crude-oil-suppliers-to-china/#:~:text=1%20Saudi%20Arabia%3A%20US%2440.1%20billion%20%2816.8%25%20of%20China%E2%80%99s,10%20United%20Kingdom%3A%20%246.3%20%282.7%25%29%20More%20items…%20

        China gets 2.3% of its oil imports from the US. But big bad Stevie pooh says the US will cut China’s oil imports off? He is incompetent at even oil where he claims to be a world class consultant!

        1. Steven Kopits

          Once again, you have no understanding of the oil business.

          Much of China’s imports must cross the Strait of Hormuz and the Strait of Malacca. The US Navy controls both of these vital choke points. If you’re a Chinese planner banking on the US not enforcing control over these choke points, you are out of your mind. Therefore, China’s strategy necessarily rests on gaining control over both of the vital narrows. In other words, an attack — or even an embargo — on Taiwan, must be assumed to involve the loss of half or more of China’s oil imports. By extension, therefore, an embargo on Taiwan must be assumed to be tantamount to starting a world war, because sooner or later China will be forced into that position regardless of the original intention. A reading of the chronology of the US’s relationship with Japan from the invasion of Manchuria through Pearl Harbor makes that amply clear.

          1. pgl

            I see – you are advocating open war fare. Got it! I guess you will be leading the troops during World War III. Wait, wait – given how incompetent you are maybe you should lead the PRC’s military efforts. Taiwan will prevail in that case.

          2. Steven Kopits

            You are dead wrong, again.

            I am stating that a Chinese blockade of Taiwan may well set in motion a series of events that will necessarily culminate in a world war between China and those invested in a liberal global order. The notion that Taiwan will somehow prove a compartmentalized conflict is almost certainly false.

            Whether we ‘win’ or ‘lose’ that war is irrelevant. The global order will not recover, in significant part because China will be regarded for the coming century as a mortal danger to other nations across the globe, democracy or not.

            By the way, what does victory look like? China says, “well, that didn’t work,” and goes home? Or does Xi double down, and double down again? And then double down again? Or perhaps pause for a few years and double down again? Is the intent that the US is going to materially destroy China’s war-making capacity? How does one do that without nuclear weapons?

            China is not Russia. Taiwan is not Ukraine. At the end of the day, Ukraine is a local conflict for the moment without direct implications for the liberal order of the last 200 years. Taiwan, however, can be a global conflict without a shot being fired.

          3. pgl

            Steven Kopits
            August 24, 2022 at 11:17 am

            The chicken hawk who advocates a war with China decides to write this?

            “Whether we ‘win’ or ‘lose’ that war is irrelevant. The global order will not recover”

            I see – Princeton Steve wants all of us to die. I seriously think someone to take this troll to a padded cell where he can no longer hurt himself.

          4. pgl

            “At the end of the day, Ukraine is a local conflict for the moment without direct implications for the liberal order of the last 200 years.”

            I have been suggesting JohnH is Stevie’s new BFF as Johnny boy is rehashing Stevie’s lies about interest rates. Who knew Stevie would return the favor by advocating the JohnH agenda of promoting Putin’s war crimes.

          5. Steven Kopits

            I have never advocated war with China. That would be beyond stupid for all involved, which I have now reiterated in many forms across a large number of comments, and which you do not seem to be able to grasp.

            At the same time, yes, the US has to defend the liberal order, even at the cost of war with China. That is most certainly not a desire for war with China, but if China starts it, the US must become fully involved, win or lose. That is my view and has been my view and almost certainly will continue to be my view.

            Guys like Xi and Putin stop only when you stop them. There is no natural constraint on their aggressiveness and therefore no benefit to cowardice or appeasement. As you will recall, I — and perhaps I alone — called for direct military intervention by the west back when Putin invaded Crimea in 2014. Had the west stood up then, we would not be fighting this bitter, larger war now. There was no benefit in appeasing Putin then, as it predictably led to a larger and more serious war later. This is no less true for Xi.

      3. pgl

        “The turning point, however, was not Pearl Harbor, or even the US oil sanctions. It was the decision to invade Manchuria and Korea. That set the wheels in motion, ending in the Pacific War/”

        On December 8, 1941 my dad signed up to serve in the Navy. He and his colleagues fought bravely through some difficult battles so if he were still alive – me thinks he would come over to your house and give your arrogant but stupid self a piece of his mind. The US Navy had little to do with bringing down the Emperor? Lord – you are one insulting MORON.

        Hey troll – stick to promoting Orban’s reign of terror is your Hungary.

          1. Steven Kopits

            I am referring to the turning point to start a world war with the US, not the turning point of the Pacific War itself, which was of course Midway.

            The question I am begging is when a war between the US and Japan became inevitable. To me, that looks like the invasion of Manchuria in 1931, which, by the way, is the date some use for the start of WWII. Once the Japanese invaded Manchuria, the past to war was largely set as I read it. Japan could have, of course, derailed that track by unilaterally abandoning Manchuria and Korea, but that obviously was not going to happen. Therefore, a war between Japan and the US was in effect set in motion as early as 1931, not December 1941, which marks the official start of the war.

            The lesson for China is that an embargo or invasion of Taiwan likely leads to an inevitable war with the US, Britain, Japan, Korea and Australia, to name just a short list. There is no obvious off-ramp after that for China. Therefore, a comparison the relative strengths of China and Taiwan are largely beside the point. If China goes down that route, Beijing has to assume a full world war to control the band from Basra to the Bering Sea, because that’s where the falling dominoes will take you, sooner or later.

          2. pgl

            “I am referring to the turning point to start a world war with the US, not the turning point of the Pacific War itself, which was of course Midway.”

            Go read his first comment which specifically referred to the ending of this war. But now this incompetent troll says he was referring to the start? He cannot bother to even his own BS.

          3. Steven Kopits

            If we have to measure whether the US Navy won or lost an exchange with the Chinese navy, let me assure you, the liberal world will have ended.

          4. pgl

            Steven Kopits
            August 24, 2022 at 11:06 am

            Wow – this big brave boy is now praying the Chinese Navy and the US Navy go to war. Not that this coward would ever serve in the military. Kopits is Hungarian for Chicken Hawk.

        1. Steven Kopits

          There is no ‘reign of terror’ in Hungary. Again, you are displaying your enormous ignorance of situation in other countries. Of course, the rule of law has eroded in important ways in Hungary, but I can assure you, you are much safer walking around the streets of Budapest at any time of day or night than you are in, say, Minneapolis, Milwaukee or any major US coastal city.

          1. pgl

            As long as Stevie boy defends Orban, he forfeits the right to criticize any other nation including Xi’s China:

            https://theweek.com/articles/768453/hungarys-illiberal-democracy#:~:text=In%20a%202014%20speech%2C%20Orban%20explained%20that%20his,it%3F%20By%20exploiting%20nationalism%20and%20fear%20of%20foreigners.

            Viktor Orban is leading Hungary away from the rule of law and human rights — but with popular support. How? Here’s everything you need to know:

            How has Orban changed Hungary?
            He is turning it into a crony capitalist state with what is effectively one-party rule. Viktor Orban’s right-wing Fidesz party, which has had a supermajority in Hungary’s parliament since sweeping to power in 2010, has changed the constitution and enacted stringent laws guaranteeing it dominance. Fidesz controls all branches of government, including the judiciary. It has gutted the independent press, with the media now dominated by outlets that overtly support Fidesz and Orban. Businesses that are close to the party, or to Orban and his cronies, get favorable contracts, while those that are not face punishing taxes and regulations. “Authoritarian capitalism,” says Hungarian economist Gabor Scheiring, is the “new political economic model.” The takeover caught the opposition, and the European Union, by surprise. Fidesz got just 53 percent of the vote in 2010, but quirks of seat distribution gave it a two-thirds majority, and it quickly exploited its position to remake the country. In a 2014 speech, Orban explained that his vision for Hungary was an “illiberal democracy,” citing strongman states such as Russia and Turkey as models. He is well on his way to achieving that goal.

          2. pgl

            “I can assure you, you are much safer walking around the streets of Budapest at any time of day or night than you are in, say, Minneapolis, Milwaukee or any major US coastal city.”

            Wow – if there ever was a MAGA hat wearing racist, it is Princeton Steve. Trump wants to turn the US into Orban’s Hungary and it seems Stevie pulls the race card to promote this agenda. BTW I do feel safe walking around NYC but if your ilk starts to infest my streets, it will make my city a much worse place.

          3. Steven Kopits

            Hungary remains a democracy. Orban remains popular. But whatever Hungary’s shortcomings, there is a huge difference between a liberal democracy and a reign of terror. For example, Cambodia remains an autocracy and yet ranks as an emerging destination for expatriates. There is no Pol Pot in Cambodia today. It may be no democracy, but it is far, far from suffering a reign of terror. I appreciate that you cannot tell the difference, but it is massive.

          4. pgl

            Steven Kopits
            August 24, 2022 at 11:04 am
            Hungary remains a democracy. Orban remains popular. But whatever Hungary’s shortcomings, there is a huge difference between a liberal democracy

            Even your boy Orban admits his reign is NOT a liberal democracy. Damn – did you flunk preK reading or what? Stop LYING.

          5. pgl

            OK – a lot of places are not as bad as the Killing Fields under Pol Pot. But give us a damn break. One does not have to murder 3 million of your own people to be a horrific ruling. Orban is a disgusting racist but then that is why you admire him.

          6. Steven Kopits

            How has Orban changed Hungary?

            He is turning it into a crony capitalist state with what is effectively one-party rule. Viktor Orban’s right-wing Fidesz party, which has had a supermajority in Hungary’s parliament since sweeping to power in 2010, has changed the constitution and enacted stringent laws guaranteeing it dominance. Fidesz controls all branches of government, including the judiciary. It has gutted the independent press, with the media now dominated by outlets that overtly support Fidesz and Orban. Businesses that are close to the party, or to Orban and his cronies, get favorable contracts, while those that are not face punishing taxes and regulations. “Authoritarian capitalism,” says Hungarian economist Gabor Scheiring, is the “new political economic model.” The takeover caught the opposition, and the European Union, by surprise. Fidesz got just 53 percent of the vote in 2010, but quirks of seat distribution gave it a two-thirds majority, and it quickly exploited its position to remake the country. In a 2014 speech, Orban explained that his vision for Hungary was an “illiberal democracy,” citing strongman states such as Russia and Turkey as models. He is well on his way to achieving that goal.

            This summarizes the situation as I understand it. No one has contended that the recent elections were not legitimate, but it is widely accepted that FIDESZ has used the tools available to it to tilt the playing field, just as described in the passage above. Still, Hungarians voted for Orban with a comfortable majority, and if you talk to people on the ground, they will reflect that view. So it is a democracy, albeit of an illiberal sort, and I was not implying that Hungary was a liberal democracy above. Rather, I was making perfectly clear that there is no ‘reign of terror’ in Hungary. In terms of safety, Budapest beats, say, Los Angeles or San Francisco hands down.

            The problem, rather, is that FIDESZ won a supermajority and thereby was able to effectively gut the checks and balances which a healthy democracy requires. This in turn catalyzed the rise of a kleptocracy which has become interwoven with that of Putin’s Russia. Thus, Hungary has become a kind of ‘made man’ in the Russian mafia. This in turn has undermined property rights, such that I would not consider buying property or investing in Hungary a good idea right now. This is a profoundly unfortunate state of affairs, and the reason I supported the candidacy of Péter Márki-Zay. Hungary needed a change.

            The recent election, however, told us nothing new. FIDESZ has enjoyed current levels of support since 2010, and even earlier. What changed was the fragmentation of the left, now comprising some eight parties in parliament. Whereas the Socialists represented a coherent opposition to Orban through 2010, they were discredited by their fiscal policies of the time and the left fractured. The public has been pretty happy with Orban since.

            There is no ‘reign of terror’ in Hungary, only a kind of torpor, a sense of drift and a gnawing sense of uncertainly in the face of a steady rise in crony kleptocracy.

          7. AndrewG

            “How has Orban changed Hungary?

            “He is turning it into a crony capitalist state with what is effectively one-party rule. Viktor Orban’s right-wing Fidesz party, which has had a supermajority in Hungary’s parliament since sweeping to power in 2010, has changed the constitution and enacted stringent laws guaranteeing it dominance.”

            Therefore, Hungary is a democracy? How could anyone take your suggestion seriously?

            No, really, read the stuff you share. Or maybe ‘democracy’ is another word for which you have a made-up definition?

  9. Bruce Hall

    If the argument is that China has an overwhelmingly large force versus Taiwan, that is no mystery or surprise. The question is whether the acquisition of Taiwan is worth the cost. So far, it appears that the cost has been too high. Will that remain the case into the future? That depends on several factors:
    • The willingness of the US, Japan, and South Korea to provide military assistance to Taiwan
    • The willingness of the Taiwanese to resist China by all means necessary (including laying waste to the landscape and all high-value manufacturing of value to China)
    • The direct economic impact to China from world sanctions which would be imposed

    Comparing the size of military forces is interesting. Comparing the size of Russia’s nuclear forces versus Ukraine’s is also interesting, but not necessarily the only factor in a military conflict.
    https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/31/asia/china-taiwan-invasion-scenarios-analysis-intl-hnk-ml/index.html

    The kicker is this: communist regimes in the past have shown little regard for material or human costs to obtain their objectives. The Chinese Communist Party might be willing to sacrifice a trillion dollars and a million troops to achieve its goal of capturing Taiwan. After all, what’s a million troops when you have more than a thousand times that many people? Western logic may simply not apply to a communist dictatorship.

    1. baffling

      “(including laying waste to the landscape and all high-value manufacturing of value to China)”
      china does not consider acquiring those assets as a priority. that is not why they consider invading Taiwan. it is pride.

  10. AndrewG

    Interesting details.

    “Aircraft Carriers …….. 2”

    Thanks … Ukraine! From Wikipedia, on China’s first operational carrier, the Liaoning:

    “The 67,500 ton ex-Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag (Kuznetsov class), which was only 68% completed and floating in Ukraine, was purchased through a private Macau tourist venture in 1998. Following her troublesome tow to Dalian shipyard, the carrier underwent a long refit. Varyag had been stripped of any military equipment as well as her propulsion systems prior to being put up for sale. In 2007 there were news reports that she was being fitted-out to enter service.”

    Very auspicious.

  11. joseph

    Taiwan has a military budge of $17 billion for 2022, 2% of GDP. Just one Taiwan company, chip maker TSMC, has a capital expenditure budget of $44 billion for 2022.

    It doesn’t seem that Taiwan takes the Chinese military threat very seriously. Why should the U.S.?

    1. pgl

      After WWII we told Japan not to have a military. Now if the PRC attacked Japan, something tells me that the US would take that seriously.

    2. Macroduck

      Taiwan has long ceonsidere it best to avoid provoking China. For decades, that proved the right choice. Under Xi, things have changed. The U.S. is now making its dedication to Taiwan obvious because Xi has made his intention to grab power beyond China’s borders obvious.

      The lesson learned from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is also important here. Putin doubted the West would do much in response to his invasion of Ukraine. Policy makers now think ambiguity is a vice except when everyone is playing nice. China is no longer playing nice. The U.S. is removing ambiguity by showing it takes China’s threats seriously.

    3. AndrewG

      CSIS’s China Power:
      “While China releases an official defense budget, how much China actually spends on its military is widely debated. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates the overall 2021 figure to be $293.4 billion and the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) puts the number at $270 billion.”

      https://chinapower.csis.org/military-spending/#:~:text=China%E2%80%99s%20defense%20spending%20has%20seen%20a%20nearly%20six-fold,spending%20is%20second%20only%20to%20the%20United%20States.

      How this might compare to say, a Western military at ~$300B a year is very debatable. In any case, the numbers don’t take into consideration morale and will to fight of those on the ground, and political will.

      Any thoughts on the quick-growing Chinese military budget ltr? No?

  12. ltr

    I assume —– would use the ——- tactics of massive civilian terror.

    [ This assumption is of course malicious. The assumption is savagely prejudiced. ]

    1. AndrewG

      But China would never launch an invasion of a neighboring country, right? Think you can ask your boss? Inquiring minds want to know what you guys are planning with that huge defense budget that you don’t want to talk about.

    2. Macroduck

      It’s a perfectly reasonable assumption. After all, China keeps millions of people enslave, probably the second highest number of any country in the world:

      https://reliefweb.int/report/world/which-countries-have-highest-rates-modern-slavery-and-most-victims

      And China’s client, North Korea, the highest per capita rate of slavery in the world. The idea that China would restrain itself in war is laughable. Too moral to kill, but not too moral for slaves? That’s a silly claim.

    3. Bruce Hall

      ltr, given China’s willingness to use severe repressive force against inhabitants of its own country and the CCP’s history of massive killings, it is not a “savagely prejudiced” assumption that the CCP would uses all means at its disposal, including targeting civilians, to acquire Taiwan.

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1994/07/17/how-many-died-new-evidence-suggests-far-higher-numbers-for-the-victims-of-mao-zedongs-era/01044df5-03dd-49f4-a453-a033c5287bce/
      https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10281

  13. pgl

    Some good news:

    https://seekingalpha.com/news/3875878-pfizer-moderna-to-deliver-175m-doses-of-updated-covid-shots-for-september-rollout

    The U.S. government has completed plans to implement a fall booster campaign in September that will deliver 175M doses of updated COVID-19 vaccines to states, pharmacies, and other vaccination sites. The Biden administration is purchasing the redesigned COVID-19 shots from vaccine makers who received guidance from the FDA in June to update their vaccines to protect against the latest subvariants of Omicron and the original COVID strain. Over the past few weeks, messenger-RNA-based vaccine makers Pfizer (NYSE:PFE)/ BioNTech (BNTX) and their rival Moderna (MRNA) announced new agreements to deliver 105M and 66M doses of updated COVID-19 vaccine doses to the government, respectively. The health officials have informed states, pharmacies, and other sites to start preordering the shots now through Aug. 30, according to the fall vaccination planning guide published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Shipments will begin after the regulators clear the shots, which will also include components to protect against the B4 and B5 subvariants of the Omicron.
    The government expects that initially Pfizer (PFE)/BioNTech (BNTX) vaccine will be cleared for people aged 12 years and above, and Moderna (MRNA) vaccine will be cleared for those aged 18 years and above.

    OK – now you can return to your daily doses of:

    Bruce Hall’s COVID-19 disinformation

    ltr’s PRC propaganda

    JohnH’s cheering on genocide in Ukriane

    Princeton Steve’s continuing lies with respect to economic data as he cheers on a RECESSION.

    1. Bruce Hall

      I’m following old Uncle Joe’s advice and getting my 17th booster which will prevent me from getting COVID and spreading it.

      1. AndrewG

        You mean *scientists’* advice? Have you heard of those people before? Many aren’t white, so I assume not.

        1. pgl

          If he has taken 17 shots, he must be getting them from China. This fool does not know the Chinese vaccine has been deemed to be very ineffective.

        2. Bruce Hall

          Just a little sarcasm about old Uncle Joe.
          https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-2021-video-saying-vaccinations-prevent-covid-resurfaces-1726900

          Interestingly, there are many people such as myself who took the vaccines (Moderna in this case) and only generated a slight response in antibodies based on quantitative testing. Although I’ve been around people who have had COVID (including my wife), I either didn’t get it or the infection was so mild I was asymptomatic and the vaccine boosters were irrelevant. Some people do get infected, but have a strong T-cell response that eliminates the virus quickly. The immune system is not that simple; it’s not all about antibodies.
          https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2020/07/28/immune-t-cells-may-offer-lasting-protection-against-covid-19/

          Old Uncle Joe followed his own advice and found out that nothing is ever as simple as it first appears. Old pgl just likes to be the site troll and make snide remarks without actually contributing much of anything.

          1. pgl

            This from the moron who told people to take bleach? BTW calling out your serial lies is not being snide. It is just telling people that your ONLY contributions here are Faux News lies. Now if you stopped liar, then you would have to cease writing comments. And the world would be a better place.

          2. pgl

            I don’t know about your dysfunctional family but in my family we respect our uncles. But trust me troll – you are not President Biden’s nephew. Besides his brain is about 30 years younger than your dementia ladened excuse for a skull.

    2. AndrewG

      My arm’s ready (if I finally qualify for booster #1).

      Any news on a combined flu/covid shot? That would be most convenient. Two microchips, one trip!

  14. ltr

    After all, what’s a million troops when you have more than a thousand times that many people? Western logic may simply not apply…

    [ Definitive savage prejudice. ]

    1. Bruce Hall

      Sure, tell it to the millions who have been persecuted and killed by the CCP. You make a weak apologist for the murderers.

      1. pgl

        Your leader Donald Trump is jealous that he was not allowed to pull this off. But come on Bruce – get your MAGA hat, your assault weapons, and do your duty filling FBI agents.

          1. pgl

            I see. 1/6/2021 never happened. And those people attacking FBI agents are Antifa? Come on Bruce – this is an entire real world out there. Turn off Faux News and get out of your basement for the first time in over 2 years.

    1. Barkley Rosser

      pgl,

      No no no. All of that is just Fake News leaks from politicized Deep State FBi, as well as National Archives, an especially politicized entity. And even if some of them were classified, Trump declassified them with his awesone post-presidential power, even thouth there seems to be nobody who is aware of him having done so. That he did it in his mind is sufficient, of course!

        1. Barkley Rosser

          Probably not, “Anonymous.” Judge has already made it clear that effort by Trump to find out who the witnesses are will not be satisfied because of attacks on FBI agents whose names got released by Breitbart. It is now being reported that multiple witnesses saw Trump rummaging through all the documents back in December, 2021, 8 months after National Archives legally demanded he turn them all over. Oh yes, he would love to get the names of those people talking to the FBI about his seriously criminal behavior so as to put pressure on them.

          Ain’t gonna happen.

          Wow, it is a close call who is dumber here, you or CoRev. And you two clowns claim to have actually had clearances and dealt with classified stuff? I am certainly glad that is apparently no longer the case for either of you.

    2. AndrewG

      This is what’s so infuriating about the dodging and weaving of Trump supporters about these documents.

      The Archives KNEW he had classified documents.

      The Archives ASKED FOR THEM BACK. (In other words, there’s zero evidence they were declassified, by Trump or anyone else.)

      TRUMP AGREED! He gave them back to the National Archives.

      But NOT ALL of them. He lied and said he didn’t have any more. That’s why the FBI had to get a warrant to go get them – after they found out he lied.

      Why would an ex-president even have these documents? Why would he give some back, but then try to keep others? At least with Clinton, she was actually privy to that sensitive information she was mishandling. Not so with an ex-president. Citizen Trump shouldn’t have had the documents to begin with – but he took them from the White House anyway knowing his term was over. This is 10x worse. It was no accident. He knew exactly what he was doing – even signed the law making the penalty for such actions harsher.

      And no, no ex-president has ever been in this situation. That’s just made up, nutty crap floating around Truth Social.

      How could anyone possibly defend Trump at this point? He keeps making fools of his staunchest defenders.

      1. Barkley Rosser

        Oh it is worse. He gave back a first batch in January and then a second batch in June, then having his lawyers claim that was it. But it was not. There was more. And he never had a right to any of it once out of office, including all the non-classified stuff, but somehow he thinks that it is all his and is demanding it back.

  15. AndrewG

    A dark thought:

    ltr’s comments about US veterans’ costs are not the usual “CHINA GOOD, AMERICA BAD.” They’re a veiled threat.

    If we had an active betting market, smart money would now be on ltr being a professional troll.

      1. AndrewG

        Have you ever had a wife cake? Like a real one someone brought from a trip to China or HK? OMG I would totally agree to be paid in those.

  16. David O'Rear

    Here’s what we think might be the way it plays out.

    Xi Jinping decides to test the waters with his colleagues, to see who would stand up to him if he decided to start a war over Taiwan. He calls an expanded Politburo Standing Committee (the PBSC, 7 members) plus the Military Affairs Commission (the MAC, another 7).

    Xi: “Can you do it?”
    PBSC: “Yessir, yessir, three bags full sir!”
    MAC: “It depends on what the American do.”
    PBSC: “Oh. You wanted our opinions? Huh, that’s new.”

    Xi: “We can’t afford to fail. If we start this, and don’t finish it very fast, the popular reaction may be more than we are prepared for.”

    MAC: “We’ve seen what happened in the Middle East when the Americans decided to get rough, and in Ukraine, when they decided to just supply the defenders with a bucket load of weapons.”

    Xi: “Yes, and the last time you guys fought a real battle, you got your heads handed to you, didn’t you? I’m looking at you Vietnam veterans now…”

    MAC: “Our considered opinion is that the time is not right. Let’s think about it again in 20 years.”

    PBSC: “Do you still want our opinion? No? Oh, good!”

    XI: “This meeting is over.”

  17. ltr

    —– PRC propaganda
    —– PRC propaganda
    —– PRC propaganda

    [ Of course, all that was done was to set down research published by prominent senior scholars at the Watson Institute at Brown University. Belittling, as “PRC propaganda,” the acclaimed work of a Harvard professor published at Brown University is distressing. ]

    1. AndrewG

      Is this your job? Do you work for the Chinese government? A “no” would be taken seriously, even if it’s matched with [ceaseless racism] or whatever. I’d believe you.

    2. AndrewG

      And please take my comments about stress and anger seriously. That stuff can creep up on you and pounce.

  18. David O'Rear

    Anonymous,

    Yes, diesel-electric subs can be very quiet. IF the propellers and other noise-makers are very quiet, too.
    The US Navy sets the benchmark, and also spends a lot of time listening to noisy PLAN subs.

    AndrewG,
    Up until a couple of years ago, China had the same number of pilots with carrier experience as it did during Zheng He’s era … zero.
    Today, is has the same number of combat-experienced pilots as it did under Qin Shi Huang Di … somewhat below one.

    Next subject: the PRC military budget has just about nothing in common with NATO military budgets. What is important to recognize is the quality gap. The PLA, for example, doesn’t really have a cadre of NCOs … think about that.
    G.I. Zhou doesn’t have a grizzled old sergeant looking after his sorry butt…

    As for targeting civilians, there don’t appear to be many examples in PLA history of such behavior. Civil War, Korea, Vietnam … not until Tiananmen, and that wasn’t combat. On the other hand, the PLA does have a sad history of poor treatment of veterans. There have been periodic protests by those who served in the 1979-91 Sino-Viet War.

    1. AndrewG

      Thank you for these details.

      I would also consider China’s huge (geographic) size. They may legitimately need a large military in absolute terms. But that’s $300B spread across a landmass about that of the USA (continental). And unlike Canada, China’s surrounded by countries they’ve been to war with recently.

      “The PLA, for example, doesn’t really have a cadre of NCOs … think about that.”

      Am I right in saying that sounds like Russia, and Ukraine before US training in 2014?

    2. Ulenspiegel

      “Yes, diesel-electric subs can be very quiet. IF the propellers and other noise-makers are very quiet, too.
      The US Navy sets the benchmark, and also spends a lot of time listening to noisy PLAN subs.”

      The USN does not set the benchmark, nuclear subs are noisy. If you want silent subs, look to Europe or South Korea where subs with fuel cells are built. And it is a common occurence that the crews of these subs take interesting periscope pictures of US carriers when playing attackers in NATO exercises.

    1. AndrewG

      I probably know even less, but here’s the gist of what I’ve learned about this (2 links):

      NCOs are the US military’s greatest strength — and one of Russia’s biggest weaknesses | Task & Purpose | Mar 25, 2022
      https://taskandpurpose.com/news/russia-noncomissioned-officers-us-military/

      Russians ‘Running Away’ From Ukraine NCO Corps Is an Example to Partners, Air Force Leaders Say | Air Force Mag | Aug 1, 2022
      https://www.airforcemag.com/russia-running-away-from-ukraine-nco-corps-is-an-example-to-partners-air-force-leaders-say/
      “The Ukrainian government saw the need to get past the Soviet model of training NCOs and create a more Western model with the help of NATO and the help of the United States of America,” Senior Enlisted Advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Ramón “CZ” Colón-López told NCO leaders from 65 nations and NATO.

      “It’s no mistake and no chance that the Russians are running away from them right now,” he told the Air Force chief master sergeant equivalents. “They’ve trained more specifically on the access to information and the empowerment of those NCOs.”

Comments are closed.