The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
China Mulls Nuclear Parity
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

This, at least, is the insistent suggestion of Hu Xijin, chief editor of The Global Times:

… China’s nuclear deterrent is an ambiguous strategy and I should not spell out how many nuclear weapons China needs. In fact, over 1,000 nuclear warheads and at least 100 DF-41 ICBMs that I mentioned are not exact number, but the concept of magnitude. … China is already defined by the US as a major strategic competitor. If the US continues to believe with certainty that China has only a few hundred nuclear warheads, it will be dangerous for China.

Here’s a Twitter thread on this:

The Global Times represents the more nationalistic faction of the CPC to the world’s Anglophone audience, and it would be strange if it hasn’t been gaining ascendancy within the past few months.

This isn’t just some blowhard ranting away, but a trial balloon at the very least.

Of course, there are theories that China already has nuclear parity with the US/Russia (a 6,000 km tunnel/bunker system seems like overkill for the modest arsenal it claims to have). If so this would be a simple matter of progressively unveiling existing warhead stocks.

Otherwise, a rapidly expansion in nuclear weaponry wouldn’t be difficult. The US was adding thousands of warheads to its arsenal throughout the 1950s. They are not extremely complex or expensive items for a modern industrial economy.

I agree with Hu Xijin that it makes sense.

First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization, which is progressively doing away with modest goals like quiet rise and moderately prosperous society by 2050 in favor of loftier global ambitions.

Second, with the increasingly irrational behavior of the US, depriving their technically unsophisticated policy-making elites of any delusions that they might have about “nuclear primary” and the feasibility of a “disarming strike” is a very reasonable goal.

That said, it will become increasingly vital for all future US-Russian nuclear weapons control discussions and agreements to also cover China.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: China, Military, Nuclear Weapons, Sinotriumph 
Hide 132 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

  2. I’ve always suspected that China’s strategic toolbox is rather greater than it appears.

    However, I would not be surprised in the slightest to learn that they have focused resources on creating a framework for a rapid expansion of the number of warheads rather than on the weapons themselves.

    I imagine that they would not wish to unduly alarm their neighbors during the ‘peaceful rise’. I also think this was a deliberate attempt to keep a low profile and stay away from any pressure to engage in arms limitations talks.

    But now that they are clearly the crab that has climbed the side of the bucket the most – now having an anemic ability to project strategic terror is a liability.

    Nuclear weapons are a relatively economical way to avoid large-scale, conventional wars – but they are only truly effective as deterrence if their existence is public and if their perceived capabilities are seen to be terrifying.

    If I were a patriotic Chinese, I would be extremely in favor of expanding the nation’s nuclear capabilities as the surest way to existentially protect my civilization. Especially since, as a patriotic Chinese of course, I would believe a lot of very interesting theories about the foreign origin of the Great Virus. I would also viewed with mistrust any domestic opposition to expanding the nuclear arsenal.

    Hu Xijin’s position seems eminently reasonable, and since he is such an important figure in the Chinese tower of status, I can’t imagine that he is alone in his views.

    I would expect to see the continued public expansion of their strategic toolbox along with the continued, covert expansion (which I would not see -grin-) of their biological and chemical capabilities.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Hu Xijin isn't a massive important figure, but he does represent the more confrontational faction. Wang Huning(CCP Party strategist) is probably the more important figure in seeking confrontation with the West, though I understand he's actually been more sidelined(though who knows after Coronavirus).
    , @Astuteobservor II
    I have been saying for a few years now. China needs to have nuclear parity to ensure peace on earth.

    Retards at DC are crazy enough to attempt anything.

    This is for the safety of all of us. Not just the Chinese.

    , @Anonymous (n)
    Agreed, minus the coronavirus bit. It's pretty ridiculous for China to possess a less powerful long range ICBM force than the likes of Britain and France. In fact, if the public information regarding the Chinese nuclear deterrent is more or less correct, US military planners may feel somewhat confident of being able to take out the vast majority of it via a carefully orchestrated first strike. It seems rather foolish to be in the process of building up the world's foremost economic power only to leave yourself with a very obvious and easily fixed Achilles' heel.
  3. Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.

    Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt.

    Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.

    There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare.

    If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by.

    [MORE]

  4. Chinese probably already have near parity with US/Russia in terms of nuclear warheads however unlike Russia and specially the US its sea based deterrent is presently not very effective and its SSBN submarines are at least 1-1.5 gen behind the US/Russia in terms of quietness and the South China sea is not as challenging a place for SSNs to hunt SSBNs as the arctic ocean especially considering the very sophisticated tracking systems deployed by US/Japan.

    Therefore the effective Chinese nuclear weapons are primarily land based and vulnerable to a first strike even if deployed in tunnels and mountains.

    We will see a 3 tier nuclear weapons state hierarchy over the next 10 years.

    Tier 1 US,Russia China(1500 + deployed nukes full triad with multiple platforms)

    Tier 2 UK,France, India(200-500 deployed nukes around 3-4 SSBNs each limited triad with France(ASMP Air to surface missile) and India(Agni missile system) )

    Tier 3 Israel,Pakistan,N Korea(Mostly land based IRBM/ICBMs,a few nukes on cruise missiles on conventional subs)

    • Agree: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Blinky Bill

    The South China sea is not as challenging a place for SSNs to hunt SSBNs as the arctic ocean especially considering the very sophisticated tracking systems deployed by US/Japan.
     

    In a recent article by the newspaper Independent Military Review [Независимое военное обозрение] Russian military specialist Alexander Shirokorad [Александр Широкорад] embraces the notion of joint Russia-China air and missile defense for the Arctic, but he also unexpectedly floats the entirely new concept of allowing Chinese submarines, nuclear-armed “boomers” or SSBNs at that, to gain critical support from Russian Arctic ports.

    The idea seems quite preposterous at first glance. Both countries are extremely touchy regarding sovereignty issues. Russians, so it would seem, would not be eager for China to gain a military foothold in this ultra-sensitive area along Russia’s northern flank. Meanwhile, China has only one military base overseas in Djibouti and has almost no experience with the hazardous maritime (let alone undersea) environment on the roof of the world. And yet, there could actually be a basis for investigating this admittedly eccentric proposition. Chinese strategists have previously discussed the Arctic as a Russia-China cooperative zone of strategic “resistance space [对抗的空间” to U.S. pressure.

    Let us explore the Russian military analyst Shirokorad’s logic. He begins with a mystery, noting the slightly bizarre comments of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Finland during early May. According to the Russian analyst, Pompeo “broke out into an angry tirade aimed at the Celestial Kingdom [разразился гневной тирадой в адрес Поднебесной],” explaining that he accused Beijing of trying to turn the Arctic into the South China Sea. Noting the peculiarity of the chief American diplomat’s apparent fixation with the Northern Sea Route (NSR), Shirokorad observes caustically: “Taking into account the geography of American trade routes, ship owners from the United States are no more concerned about the Northern Sea Route than flying to Mars.”

    Shirokorad, who has significant knowledge of both submarine operations and also the Arctic region, then throws Pompeo a “life-line,” suggesting that the secretary of state was merely reflecting the notion articulated in the most recent Department of Defense report on Chinese military power: “[Beijing’s military plans for the Arctic] could include deploying submarines to the region as a deterrent against nuclear attacks.” Notably, the very next sentence of that U.S. government report hints at possible Russia-China frictions along the NSR, for example, with respect to the deployment of non-Russian ice-breakers along that route.

    Somewhat surprisingly, this Russian military analyst asserts that American concerns are actually logical from the standpoint of nuclear and naval strategy. Offering a short course on Cold War ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) strategy, he explains that Soviet admirals were duly embarrassed in 1962 when “all the Russian rocket submarines turned out to be useless due to the American ASW system [все советские ракетные подводные лодки оказались бессильными перед американской системой ПЛО].” While Soviet submarines could effectively threaten European cities, Kremlin strategists were perturbed by U.S. deployments of American SSBNs to bases at Holy Loch (UK), Rota (Spain) and also Pearl Harbor. From these advanced bases, they could easily access their patrol areas and range all Soviet homeland targets.

    By contrast, “in order to fire their weapons and hit U.S. territory, Soviet submarines had to travel 7,000 to 8,000 kilometers to reach patrol areas and then make the return journey [для применения оружия по территории США советским подводным ракетоносцам приходилось совершать 7–8-тысячекилометровые переходы до районов боевого патрулирования и обратно].” Of course, increasing missile ranges allowed the Soviets to favorably alter those patrol areas, so that eventually they could even hit U.S. targets from “essentially pier side [фактически от пирсов.].” This trend enabled the Soviet Navy to utilize natural geography and climate. By the 1980s, the Soviet Navy regularly sent SSBN patrols under the ice of the Arctic. Searching out Russian ‘boomers’ in the “ice jungle” of the Arctic proved more than a little challenging, even for the U.S. Navy that pioneered such operations with the famous Nautilus. Shirokorod explains that Russian SSBNs were capable of breaking through ice up to two meters thick in order to unleash their salvo nuclear-armed missiles.

    Turning back to China’s undersea deterrent and potential parallels to earlier Soviet naval dilemmas, this Russian military expert observes that, geographically, the Chinese coast is a “huge distance [огромное расстояние]” from targets in the American heartland. Moreover, he assesses Chinese SSBNs as highly vulnerable to adversary forces in the open ocean areas of the Asia-Pacific.

    Here is where he drops the bombshell, or perhaps more accurately, the depth bomb. He asserts, “In venturing to the Arctic, the Chinese ‘immediately kill two birds with one stone’: significantly decreasing vulnerability and simultaneously reducing the distance to potential targets [Выйдя в Арктику, китайцы ‘убивают сразу двух зайцев’: резко уменьшается уязвимость их лодок и в разы сокращается дистанция до потенциальных целей].” He estimates that Arctic deployments of the Chinese SSBN force would reduce missile flight distances by 3.5 times.

    If it’s not disturbing enough to see such an idea discussed openly in a major Russian newspaper, then Shirokorod actually goes a couple of steps further down the path of the New Cold War. “In the future, the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China may also begin to create a joint anti-aircraft system and anti-missile defense system in the Arctic . . . [В перспективе РФ и КНР могут приступить и к созданию в Арктике совместной системы противовоздушной (ПВО) и противоракетной (ПРО) обороны],” he writes. After all, he reasons, the United States has been “planning to undertake strikes” via the Arctic against both China and Russia since the 1950s.

    That cooperation in air and missile defense could also support the submarine component of Russia-China strategic cooperation in the Arctic is reasonably clear, but the analyst then makes the most extraordinary statement in this regard: “on our Arctic islands, the Chinese can deploy supply and communications systems for their strategic missile submarines. [на наших арктических островах китайцы могут развернуть систему снабжения и связи своих подводных ракетоносцев].” In the final paragraph of the essay, Shirokorod asks if such steps could endanger Russia and answers his own question emphatically: “Definitely not [Однозначно нет].”

    In closing, it must be emphasized that this article’s importance should not be exaggerated. The musings of a single Russian strategist do not equal a new approach to Russia-China strategic cooperation, let alone a concrete bilateral military cooperation agreement on the deployment of the most prized, nuclear assets. Neither Moscow nor Beijing have given anything close to an official imprimatur to such eccentric ideas. And yet there is a small possibility that this one vision of the future could reach fruition in coming decades if current trends toward cold war are not reversed. Moscow would have its fully built out Arctic infrastructure (both military and commercial) with ample Chinese capital and engineering assistance. In return, Beijing would gain a reliable way to strike America and thus enhance its nuclear deterrent.

  5. I’m trying to understand why they would be openly discussing this. I guess while warheads can be hidden, it is hard to hide many of their delivery mechanisms, like ballistic subs. Therefore, perhaps it eases tensions slightly, rather than if they never mentioned it, while building up visible things like silos.

    Still, I’m lukewarm about the idea. As, I mentioned before – I think the theory of MAD is obsolete and mistaken. It treats a country like there is no elite political class, living in the major cities, who would be terrified if you dropped a warhead on their condos, and favorite bistros, and theaters, let alone on their heads. And suppose somehow they got lucky, escaped the radiation and shockwave – do you think they would enjoy contemplating what the minorities who survived the strike would do, when the gibs stopped?

    I wonder what the cost of this build-up would be. I’m guessing it could not be done on the cheap, and that there are other more sensible investments, like quality propaganda, or technology. I don’t think it is worth it, unless they are considering some off-the-label use, other than MAD.

    Would a new Cold War be good for the West? Personally, I don’t think so. We are in a pretty perilous situation right now, without a major power actively promoting a fifth column.

    • Agree: Unit472
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    I don’t think it is worth it, unless they are considering some off-the-label use, other than MAD.
     
    Given how crazy the US is they probably don't have any choice.

    Would a new Cold War be good for the West? Personally, I don’t think so
     
    I agree, but you're probably a sane person. It's obvious that major elements within the US elites are determined to have a new Cold War. And there are plenty of ordinary Americans who will go along with it.

    Maybe the Chinese are starting to understand that when it comes to the US they are not dealing with sane people.
    , @Elmer's Washable School Glue

    As, I mentioned before – I think the theory of MAD is obsolete and mistaken. It treats a country like there is no elite political class, living in the major cities, who would be terrified if you dropped a warhead on their condos, and favorite bistros, and theaters, let alone on their heads.
     
    This is why "nuclear parity" isn't really necessary, just "nuclear capability." Even if only a few nukes have the capability to hit a major American city, that is still enough to scare elites into avoiding nuclear war.

    However, the advantage of building a larger arsenal is redundancy; you need to have enough separate delivery systems to make deactivating them all implausible. That would include a multitude of separate delivery methods (ICBMs, aerial bombs, and submarines) but increasing the total number of necessary targets also helps.
  6. @Octavian
    I've always suspected that China's strategic toolbox is rather greater than it appears.

    However, I would not be surprised in the slightest to learn that they have focused resources on creating a framework for a rapid expansion of the number of warheads rather than on the weapons themselves.

    I imagine that they would not wish to unduly alarm their neighbors during the 'peaceful rise'. I also think this was a deliberate attempt to keep a low profile and stay away from any pressure to engage in arms limitations talks.

    But now that they are clearly the crab that has climbed the side of the bucket the most - now having an anemic ability to project strategic terror is a liability.

    Nuclear weapons are a relatively economical way to avoid large-scale, conventional wars - but they are only truly effective as deterrence if their existence is public and if their perceived capabilities are seen to be terrifying.

    If I were a patriotic Chinese, I would be extremely in favor of expanding the nation's nuclear capabilities as the surest way to existentially protect my civilization. Especially since, as a patriotic Chinese of course, I would believe a lot of very interesting theories about the foreign origin of the Great Virus. I would also viewed with mistrust any domestic opposition to expanding the nuclear arsenal.

    Hu Xijin's position seems eminently reasonable, and since he is such an important figure in the Chinese tower of status, I can't imagine that he is alone in his views.

    I would expect to see the continued public expansion of their strategic toolbox along with the continued, covert expansion (which I would not see -grin-) of their biological and chemical capabilities.

    Hu Xijin isn’t a massive important figure, but he does represent the more confrontational faction. Wang Huning(CCP Party strategist) is probably the more important figure in seeking confrontation with the West, though I understand he’s actually been more sidelined(though who knows after Coronavirus).

  7. @Vishnugupta
    Chinese probably already have near parity with US/Russia in terms of nuclear warheads however unlike Russia and specially the US its sea based deterrent is presently not very effective and its SSBN submarines are at least 1-1.5 gen behind the US/Russia in terms of quietness and the South China sea is not as challenging a place for SSNs to hunt SSBNs as the arctic ocean especially considering the very sophisticated tracking systems deployed by US/Japan.

    Therefore the effective Chinese nuclear weapons are primarily land based and vulnerable to a first strike even if deployed in tunnels and mountains.

    We will see a 3 tier nuclear weapons state hierarchy over the next 10 years.

    Tier 1 US,Russia China(1500 + deployed nukes full triad with multiple platforms)

    Tier 2 UK,France, India(200-500 deployed nukes around 3-4 SSBNs each limited triad with France(ASMP Air to surface missile) and India(Agni missile system) )

    Tier 3 Israel,Pakistan,N Korea(Mostly land based IRBM/ICBMs,a few nukes on cruise missiles on conventional subs)

    The South China sea is not as challenging a place for SSNs to hunt SSBNs as the arctic ocean especially considering the very sophisticated tracking systems deployed by US/Japan.

    [MORE]

    In a recent article by the newspaper Independent Military Review [Независимое военное обозрение] Russian military specialist Alexander Shirokorad [Александр Широкорад] embraces the notion of joint Russia-China air and missile defense for the Arctic, but he also unexpectedly floats the entirely new concept of allowing Chinese submarines, nuclear-armed “boomers” or SSBNs at that, to gain critical support from Russian Arctic ports.

    The idea seems quite preposterous at first glance. Both countries are extremely touchy regarding sovereignty issues. Russians, so it would seem, would not be eager for China to gain a military foothold in this ultra-sensitive area along Russia’s northern flank. Meanwhile, China has only one military base overseas in Djibouti and has almost no experience with the hazardous maritime (let alone undersea) environment on the roof of the world. And yet, there could actually be a basis for investigating this admittedly eccentric proposition. Chinese strategists have previously discussed the Arctic as a Russia-China cooperative zone of strategic “resistance space [对抗的空间” to U.S. pressure.

    Let us explore the Russian military analyst Shirokorad’s logic. He begins with a mystery, noting the slightly bizarre comments of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Finland during early May. According to the Russian analyst, Pompeo “broke out into an angry tirade aimed at the Celestial Kingdom [разразился гневной тирадой в адрес Поднебесной],” explaining that he accused Beijing of trying to turn the Arctic into the South China Sea. Noting the peculiarity of the chief American diplomat’s apparent fixation with the Northern Sea Route (NSR), Shirokorad observes caustically: “Taking into account the geography of American trade routes, ship owners from the United States are no more concerned about the Northern Sea Route than flying to Mars.”

    Shirokorad, who has significant knowledge of both submarine operations and also the Arctic region, then throws Pompeo a “life-line,” suggesting that the secretary of state was merely reflecting the notion articulated in the most recent Department of Defense report on Chinese military power: “[Beijing’s military plans for the Arctic] could include deploying submarines to the region as a deterrent against nuclear attacks.” Notably, the very next sentence of that U.S. government report hints at possible Russia-China frictions along the NSR, for example, with respect to the deployment of non-Russian ice-breakers along that route.

    Somewhat surprisingly, this Russian military analyst asserts that American concerns are actually logical from the standpoint of nuclear and naval strategy. Offering a short course on Cold War ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) strategy, he explains that Soviet admirals were duly embarrassed in 1962 when “all the Russian rocket submarines turned out to be useless due to the American ASW system [все советские ракетные подводные лодки оказались бессильными перед американской системой ПЛО].” While Soviet submarines could effectively threaten European cities, Kremlin strategists were perturbed by U.S. deployments of American SSBNs to bases at Holy Loch (UK), Rota (Spain) and also Pearl Harbor. From these advanced bases, they could easily access their patrol areas and range all Soviet homeland targets.

    By contrast, “in order to fire their weapons and hit U.S. territory, Soviet submarines had to travel 7,000 to 8,000 kilometers to reach patrol areas and then make the return journey [для применения оружия по территории США советским подводным ракетоносцам приходилось совершать 7–8-тысячекилометровые переходы до районов боевого патрулирования и обратно].” Of course, increasing missile ranges allowed the Soviets to favorably alter those patrol areas, so that eventually they could even hit U.S. targets from “essentially pier side [фактически от пирсов.].” This trend enabled the Soviet Navy to utilize natural geography and climate. By the 1980s, the Soviet Navy regularly sent SSBN patrols under the ice of the Arctic. Searching out Russian ‘boomers’ in the “ice jungle” of the Arctic proved more than a little challenging, even for the U.S. Navy that pioneered such operations with the famous Nautilus. Shirokorod explains that Russian SSBNs were capable of breaking through ice up to two meters thick in order to unleash their salvo nuclear-armed missiles.

    Turning back to China’s undersea deterrent and potential parallels to earlier Soviet naval dilemmas, this Russian military expert observes that, geographically, the Chinese coast is a “huge distance [огромное расстояние]” from targets in the American heartland. Moreover, he assesses Chinese SSBNs as highly vulnerable to adversary forces in the open ocean areas of the Asia-Pacific.

    Here is where he drops the bombshell, or perhaps more accurately, the depth bomb. He asserts, “In venturing to the Arctic, the Chinese ‘immediately kill two birds with one stone’: significantly decreasing vulnerability and simultaneously reducing the distance to potential targets [Выйдя в Арктику, китайцы ‘убивают сразу двух зайцев’: резко уменьшается уязвимость их лодок и в разы сокращается дистанция до потенциальных целей].” He estimates that Arctic deployments of the Chinese SSBN force would reduce missile flight distances by 3.5 times.

    If it’s not disturbing enough to see such an idea discussed openly in a major Russian newspaper, then Shirokorod actually goes a couple of steps further down the path of the New Cold War. “In the future, the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China may also begin to create a joint anti-aircraft system and anti-missile defense system in the Arctic . . . [В перспективе РФ и КНР могут приступить и к созданию в Арктике совместной системы противовоздушной (ПВО) и противоракетной (ПРО) обороны],” he writes. After all, he reasons, the United States has been “planning to undertake strikes” via the Arctic against both China and Russia since the 1950s.

    That cooperation in air and missile defense could also support the submarine component of Russia-China strategic cooperation in the Arctic is reasonably clear, but the analyst then makes the most extraordinary statement in this regard: “on our Arctic islands, the Chinese can deploy supply and communications systems for their strategic missile submarines. [на наших арктических островах китайцы могут развернуть систему снабжения и связи своих подводных ракетоносцев].” In the final paragraph of the essay, Shirokorod asks if such steps could endanger Russia and answers his own question emphatically: “Definitely not [Однозначно нет].”

    In closing, it must be emphasized that this article’s importance should not be exaggerated. The musings of a single Russian strategist do not equal a new approach to Russia-China strategic cooperation, let alone a concrete bilateral military cooperation agreement on the deployment of the most prized, nuclear assets. Neither Moscow nor Beijing have given anything close to an official imprimatur to such eccentric ideas. And yet there is a small possibility that this one vision of the future could reach fruition in coming decades if current trends toward cold war are not reversed. Moscow would have its fully built out Arctic infrastructure (both military and commercial) with ample Chinese capital and engineering assistance. In return, Beijing would gain a reliable way to strike America and thus enhance its nuclear deterrent.

    • Replies: @Vishnugupta
    I would be very surprised if anything like this actually happens except US/UK there is no such precedent of cooperation between two nuclear states.Even the article concedes this is a small possibility...
  8. @Blinky Bill

    The South China sea is not as challenging a place for SSNs to hunt SSBNs as the arctic ocean especially considering the very sophisticated tracking systems deployed by US/Japan.
     

    In a recent article by the newspaper Independent Military Review [Независимое военное обозрение] Russian military specialist Alexander Shirokorad [Александр Широкорад] embraces the notion of joint Russia-China air and missile defense for the Arctic, but he also unexpectedly floats the entirely new concept of allowing Chinese submarines, nuclear-armed “boomers” or SSBNs at that, to gain critical support from Russian Arctic ports.

    The idea seems quite preposterous at first glance. Both countries are extremely touchy regarding sovereignty issues. Russians, so it would seem, would not be eager for China to gain a military foothold in this ultra-sensitive area along Russia’s northern flank. Meanwhile, China has only one military base overseas in Djibouti and has almost no experience with the hazardous maritime (let alone undersea) environment on the roof of the world. And yet, there could actually be a basis for investigating this admittedly eccentric proposition. Chinese strategists have previously discussed the Arctic as a Russia-China cooperative zone of strategic “resistance space [对抗的空间” to U.S. pressure.

    Let us explore the Russian military analyst Shirokorad’s logic. He begins with a mystery, noting the slightly bizarre comments of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in Finland during early May. According to the Russian analyst, Pompeo “broke out into an angry tirade aimed at the Celestial Kingdom [разразился гневной тирадой в адрес Поднебесной],” explaining that he accused Beijing of trying to turn the Arctic into the South China Sea. Noting the peculiarity of the chief American diplomat’s apparent fixation with the Northern Sea Route (NSR), Shirokorad observes caustically: “Taking into account the geography of American trade routes, ship owners from the United States are no more concerned about the Northern Sea Route than flying to Mars.”

    Shirokorad, who has significant knowledge of both submarine operations and also the Arctic region, then throws Pompeo a “life-line,” suggesting that the secretary of state was merely reflecting the notion articulated in the most recent Department of Defense report on Chinese military power: “[Beijing’s military plans for the Arctic] could include deploying submarines to the region as a deterrent against nuclear attacks.” Notably, the very next sentence of that U.S. government report hints at possible Russia-China frictions along the NSR, for example, with respect to the deployment of non-Russian ice-breakers along that route.

    Somewhat surprisingly, this Russian military analyst asserts that American concerns are actually logical from the standpoint of nuclear and naval strategy. Offering a short course on Cold War ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) strategy, he explains that Soviet admirals were duly embarrassed in 1962 when “all the Russian rocket submarines turned out to be useless due to the American ASW system [все советские ракетные подводные лодки оказались бессильными перед американской системой ПЛО].” While Soviet submarines could effectively threaten European cities, Kremlin strategists were perturbed by U.S. deployments of American SSBNs to bases at Holy Loch (UK), Rota (Spain) and also Pearl Harbor. From these advanced bases, they could easily access their patrol areas and range all Soviet homeland targets.

    By contrast, “in order to fire their weapons and hit U.S. territory, Soviet submarines had to travel 7,000 to 8,000 kilometers to reach patrol areas and then make the return journey [для применения оружия по территории США советским подводным ракетоносцам приходилось совершать 7–8-тысячекилометровые переходы до районов боевого патрулирования и обратно].” Of course, increasing missile ranges allowed the Soviets to favorably alter those patrol areas, so that eventually they could even hit U.S. targets from “essentially pier side [фактически от пирсов.].” This trend enabled the Soviet Navy to utilize natural geography and climate. By the 1980s, the Soviet Navy regularly sent SSBN patrols under the ice of the Arctic. Searching out Russian ‘boomers’ in the “ice jungle” of the Arctic proved more than a little challenging, even for the U.S. Navy that pioneered such operations with the famous Nautilus. Shirokorod explains that Russian SSBNs were capable of breaking through ice up to two meters thick in order to unleash their salvo nuclear-armed missiles.

    Turning back to China’s undersea deterrent and potential parallels to earlier Soviet naval dilemmas, this Russian military expert observes that, geographically, the Chinese coast is a “huge distance [огромное расстояние]” from targets in the American heartland. Moreover, he assesses Chinese SSBNs as highly vulnerable to adversary forces in the open ocean areas of the Asia-Pacific.

    Here is where he drops the bombshell, or perhaps more accurately, the depth bomb. He asserts, “In venturing to the Arctic, the Chinese ‘immediately kill two birds with one stone’: significantly decreasing vulnerability and simultaneously reducing the distance to potential targets [Выйдя в Арктику, китайцы ‘убивают сразу двух зайцев’: резко уменьшается уязвимость их лодок и в разы сокращается дистанция до потенциальных целей].” He estimates that Arctic deployments of the Chinese SSBN force would reduce missile flight distances by 3.5 times.

    If it’s not disturbing enough to see such an idea discussed openly in a major Russian newspaper, then Shirokorod actually goes a couple of steps further down the path of the New Cold War. “In the future, the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China may also begin to create a joint anti-aircraft system and anti-missile defense system in the Arctic . . . [В перспективе РФ и КНР могут приступить и к созданию в Арктике совместной системы противовоздушной (ПВО) и противоракетной (ПРО) обороны],” he writes. After all, he reasons, the United States has been “planning to undertake strikes” via the Arctic against both China and Russia since the 1950s.

    That cooperation in air and missile defense could also support the submarine component of Russia-China strategic cooperation in the Arctic is reasonably clear, but the analyst then makes the most extraordinary statement in this regard: “on our Arctic islands, the Chinese can deploy supply and communications systems for their strategic missile submarines. [на наших арктических островах китайцы могут развернуть систему снабжения и связи своих подводных ракетоносцев].” In the final paragraph of the essay, Shirokorod asks if such steps could endanger Russia and answers his own question emphatically: “Definitely not [Однозначно нет].”

    In closing, it must be emphasized that this article’s importance should not be exaggerated. The musings of a single Russian strategist do not equal a new approach to Russia-China strategic cooperation, let alone a concrete bilateral military cooperation agreement on the deployment of the most prized, nuclear assets. Neither Moscow nor Beijing have given anything close to an official imprimatur to such eccentric ideas. And yet there is a small possibility that this one vision of the future could reach fruition in coming decades if current trends toward cold war are not reversed. Moscow would have its fully built out Arctic infrastructure (both military and commercial) with ample Chinese capital and engineering assistance. In return, Beijing would gain a reliable way to strike America and thus enhance its nuclear deterrent.

    I would be very surprised if anything like this actually happens except US/UK there is no such precedent of cooperation between two nuclear states.Even the article concedes this is a small possibility…

    • Thanks: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Blinky Bill

    China(1500 + deployed nukes full triad with multiple platforms)
     
    https://i.insider.com/5be06d529e8c5318f96ae2ba?width=400.jpg

    As you mentioned in the previous thread, engine development is key for the Chinese.

    The H-20 is a subsonic stealth bomber of the People's Liberation Army Air Force, due to enter service in the year 2025 and will be the first dedicated strategic bomber developed solely by China. Many American military analysts expect the H-20 to have a range of at least 12,000 kilometers, a payload capacity of 20 tons and be able to carry nuclear weapons.

    , @Jatt Aryaa
    What are your thoughts on moving to a place like Krasnodar now that residency is just a condo away?
    Relatives are scattered around west but see writing on the wall

    "whites are racist, but the black-muslim future is worse"

    Still have property in India but another Sonia gov will result in a UC/Sikh genocide anyway..
  9. Chinese nukes in the Arctic on Russian bases would be a valid reason for an air strike unless those nukes are withdrawn I wash my hands of this moral issue.

  10. The frightening aspect of this is that trillions of dollars get spent by “experts” who indulge in fantasy thinking as official policy – and unlike the Emperor’s New Clothes – nobody exposes it.

    They build up conventional weapons and bases against Russia and China as if a conventional war were actually possible. Add to this dangerous delusion, the emphasis on the threat of climate change while ignoring that the threat of nuclear war has never gone away.

    And they add to this danger by trying to build dial down nukes and eagerly bombing Syria despite Russian forces being there. They don’t seem to care.

    If there was any doubt about the wild carelessness of this collective madness, look at the fact that the next President will apparently be an elderly man with mental problems who publicly confabulates.

  11. “That said, it will become increasingly vital for all future US-Russian nuclear weapons control discussions and agreements to also cover China.”

    A tri-lateral agreement will handicap China and hugely disadvantage Russia because US will almost certainly insist that any expansion of China’s stock be compensated with reduction of Russian ones. China will not join such agreement, especially if UK and France didn’t.

    I believe China’s current strategy is a mixture of diversity and diversion – e.g. declaring no “first use” and yet mixing convention/nuclear warheads, keeping low official number and yet talking big, pursuit of emerging tech (e.g. hypersonic, anti-satellite) while go slow with the traditional tri-leg (submarine/air) etc. They are more interested in breaking rules and calculations laid down from the cold war.

  12. @Octavian
    I've always suspected that China's strategic toolbox is rather greater than it appears.

    However, I would not be surprised in the slightest to learn that they have focused resources on creating a framework for a rapid expansion of the number of warheads rather than on the weapons themselves.

    I imagine that they would not wish to unduly alarm their neighbors during the 'peaceful rise'. I also think this was a deliberate attempt to keep a low profile and stay away from any pressure to engage in arms limitations talks.

    But now that they are clearly the crab that has climbed the side of the bucket the most - now having an anemic ability to project strategic terror is a liability.

    Nuclear weapons are a relatively economical way to avoid large-scale, conventional wars - but they are only truly effective as deterrence if their existence is public and if their perceived capabilities are seen to be terrifying.

    If I were a patriotic Chinese, I would be extremely in favor of expanding the nation's nuclear capabilities as the surest way to existentially protect my civilization. Especially since, as a patriotic Chinese of course, I would believe a lot of very interesting theories about the foreign origin of the Great Virus. I would also viewed with mistrust any domestic opposition to expanding the nuclear arsenal.

    Hu Xijin's position seems eminently reasonable, and since he is such an important figure in the Chinese tower of status, I can't imagine that he is alone in his views.

    I would expect to see the continued public expansion of their strategic toolbox along with the continued, covert expansion (which I would not see -grin-) of their biological and chemical capabilities.

    I have been saying for a few years now. China needs to have nuclear parity to ensure peace on earth.

    Retards at DC are crazy enough to attempt anything.

    This is for the safety of all of us. Not just the Chinese.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  13. @Vishnugupta
    I would be very surprised if anything like this actually happens except US/UK there is no such precedent of cooperation between two nuclear states.Even the article concedes this is a small possibility...

    China(1500 + deployed nukes full triad with multiple platforms)


    As you mentioned in the previous thread, engine development is key for the Chinese.

    The H-20 is a subsonic stealth bomber of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force, due to enter service in the year 2025 and will be the first dedicated strategic bomber developed solely by China. Many American military analysts expect the H-20 to have a range of at least 12,000 kilometers, a payload capacity of 20 tons and be able to carry nuclear weapons.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    And the sad thing about these developments, as Pat Buchanan recently put it:

    The mighty malevolent China we face today was made in the USA.
     
    It looks like outsourcing so many manufacturing jobs to countries like China is going to figure high in Trump's reelection strategy:

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1258416273823805443

  14. @Blinky Bill

    China(1500 + deployed nukes full triad with multiple platforms)
     
    https://i.insider.com/5be06d529e8c5318f96ae2ba?width=400.jpg

    As you mentioned in the previous thread, engine development is key for the Chinese.

    The H-20 is a subsonic stealth bomber of the People's Liberation Army Air Force, due to enter service in the year 2025 and will be the first dedicated strategic bomber developed solely by China. Many American military analysts expect the H-20 to have a range of at least 12,000 kilometers, a payload capacity of 20 tons and be able to carry nuclear weapons.

    And the sad thing about these developments, as Pat Buchanan recently put it:

    The mighty malevolent China we face today was made in the USA.

    It looks like outsourcing so many manufacturing jobs to countries like China is going to figure high in Trump’s reelection strategy:

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill

    As Pat Buchanan recently put it
     
    I believe it is an appropriate time to repost this wonderful video from 1990.

    https://youtu.be/C8_W16d3d1M

    A must watch for all those who want to understand the past.
    Thank you to whoever posted it first.
  15. @songbird
    I'm trying to understand why they would be openly discussing this. I guess while warheads can be hidden, it is hard to hide many of their delivery mechanisms, like ballistic subs. Therefore, perhaps it eases tensions slightly, rather than if they never mentioned it, while building up visible things like silos.

    Still, I'm lukewarm about the idea. As, I mentioned before - I think the theory of MAD is obsolete and mistaken. It treats a country like there is no elite political class, living in the major cities, who would be terrified if you dropped a warhead on their condos, and favorite bistros, and theaters, let alone on their heads. And suppose somehow they got lucky, escaped the radiation and shockwave - do you think they would enjoy contemplating what the minorities who survived the strike would do, when the gibs stopped?

    I wonder what the cost of this build-up would be. I'm guessing it could not be done on the cheap, and that there are other more sensible investments, like quality propaganda, or technology. I don't think it is worth it, unless they are considering some off-the-label use, other than MAD.

    Would a new Cold War be good for the West? Personally, I don't think so. We are in a pretty perilous situation right now, without a major power actively promoting a fifth column.

    I don’t think it is worth it, unless they are considering some off-the-label use, other than MAD.

    Given how crazy the US is they probably don’t have any choice.

    Would a new Cold War be good for the West? Personally, I don’t think so

    I agree, but you’re probably a sane person. It’s obvious that major elements within the US elites are determined to have a new Cold War. And there are plenty of ordinary Americans who will go along with it.

    Maybe the Chinese are starting to understand that when it comes to the US they are not dealing with sane people.

  16. hgv says:

    Slightly off-topic: doesnt the fact that it takes a nation 4.5 times its size to compete (and beat) the US speak volumes about its greatness? Imagine its power if there were 300 million white Americans, or 400, or 500…even China would then be only a satellite. I know that USA bashing is a popular sport the world over, but…when you realise how much that country is doing, with so little (by comparison)…it really deserves respect.

    • Replies: @Jatt Aryaa
    when the best interests of society required the unification of the numerous tribes and peoples which had settled on the soil of the Roman Empire. By overthrowing the barriers between inimical families and races, ruinous internecine warfare was diminished and greater peace and harmony secured

    https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04264a.htm

    In other words, the Church promoted consensual and egalitarian marriage relations based on the free will of individual men and women. This is what Siedentop means by the Catholic "invention of individualism".

    https://www.eurocanadian.ca/2020/04/kevin-macdonald-hail-catholic-5church-forcing-monogamy-upon-nobility.html

    Besides literal global race-mixing and gay rights what is there for the white race to be proud of?
    , @Daemon
    You're ignoring the time component. The US industrialised right at the start of the 20th Century whereas China did not start until the late 60's to 70's. This is akin to running a competitive marathon where the other party starts 60/70% into the lap and you are now neck and neck with him.

    Not really impressive if you think about it that way.

    , @Ultrafart the Brave
    "when you realise how much that country is doing, with so little (by comparison)…it really deserves respect."

    When you consider how much Al Capone accomplished with so few henchmen, he really deserved respect.
  17. A total waste of money. The idea that any nation can salvo launch hundreds of ICBMs ( most of which have been sitting around in silos or sub missile rooms for years) and be able to hit with precision another nations entire command and control centers and retaliatory weapons was one of the most demented doctrines of the Cold War. Look how difficult it is to launch a single space mission!

    Hundreds of engineers and technicians checking and double checking every system. Weather forecasts considered and if unfavorable the launch is aborted. Now some leader is going to cast his fate to the wind and rely on a bunch of junior officers most of whom have only done simulated launches to conduct the real thing and salvo launch (never been attempted) hundreds of nuclear armed missiles? Madness!

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @The Alarmist

    The idea that any nation can salvo launch hundreds of ICBMs ( most of which have been sitting around in silos or sub missile rooms for years) and be able to hit with precision another nations entire command and control centers and retaliatory weapons was one of the most demented doctrines of the Cold War.
     
    1) Nukes were used to get around the need for precision;
    2) A lot of talented people were dedicated to making it workable;
    3) Nobody in the business kidded themselves that every target would be hit;
    4) To assure that #3 was not going to be a problem, multiple warheads from multiple delivery systems were dedicated to a given target;
    5) Decapitation was desired, but counterforce targetting was paramount;
    6) Lots of Intel resources were dedicated to finding the adversary's mobile systems and C3I;
    7) The fact that one couldn't guarantee taking out all of the adversary's systems and C3I removed the temptation to attempt a First Strike;
    8) Massive investments were made to keep our own C3I backed up and survivable;
    9) Delivery systems were periodically pulled from service and test fired to evaluate how they might degrade over time.

    It may seem demented, but it was thought through thoroughly, and it seemed to keep the peace better than having a unipower blustering its way through the world with nothing to check it.

  18. Well, I guess it was time for a NextGen Nuke anyway, but given that Los Alamos, Sandia, et al are essentially privatised and no doubt still have a number of Chinese staff, because apparently US citizens just don’t want to be engineers, which is why all the top US engineering colleges are full of Chinese students to whom people like Kushner want to give green cards … anyway, it is unlikely anything the US will cook up will remain a secret, and it would be reasonable to assume that China can build more nukes cheaper than the US, and more than a few might just work.

    BTW, it’s nuclear primacy.

  19. @Unit472
    A total waste of money. The idea that any nation can salvo launch hundreds of ICBMs ( most of which have been sitting around in silos or sub missile rooms for years) and be able to hit with precision another nations entire command and control centers and retaliatory weapons was one of the most demented doctrines of the Cold War. Look how difficult it is to launch a single space mission!

    Hundreds of engineers and technicians checking and double checking every system. Weather forecasts considered and if unfavorable the launch is aborted. Now some leader is going to cast his fate to the wind and rely on a bunch of junior officers most of whom have only done simulated launches to conduct the real thing and salvo launch (never been attempted) hundreds of nuclear armed missiles? Madness!

    The idea that any nation can salvo launch hundreds of ICBMs ( most of which have been sitting around in silos or sub missile rooms for years) and be able to hit with precision another nations entire command and control centers and retaliatory weapons was one of the most demented doctrines of the Cold War.

    1) Nukes were used to get around the need for precision;
    2) A lot of talented people were dedicated to making it workable;
    3) Nobody in the business kidded themselves that every target would be hit;
    4) To assure that #3 was not going to be a problem, multiple warheads from multiple delivery systems were dedicated to a given target;
    5) Decapitation was desired, but counterforce targetting was paramount;
    6) Lots of Intel resources were dedicated to finding the adversary’s mobile systems and C3I;
    7) The fact that one couldn’t guarantee taking out all of the adversary’s systems and C3I removed the temptation to attempt a First Strike;
    8) Massive investments were made to keep our own C3I backed up and survivable;
    9) Delivery systems were periodically pulled from service and test fired to evaluate how they might degrade over time.

    It may seem demented, but it was thought through thoroughly, and it seemed to keep the peace better than having a unipower blustering its way through the world with nothing to check it.

    • Replies: @yakushimaru

    2) A lot of talented people were dedicated to making it workable;
     
    When you look at the recent developments re COVID19, ...
    , @dfordoom

    It may seem demented, but it was thought through thoroughly, and it seemed to keep the peace better than having a unipower blustering its way through the world with nothing to check it.
     
    Yep. I felt a whole lot safer during the Cold War than I do now. The Balance of Terror worked.
  20. @hgv
    Slightly off-topic: doesnt the fact that it takes a nation 4.5 times its size to compete (and beat) the US speak volumes about its greatness? Imagine its power if there were 300 million white Americans, or 400, or 500...even China would then be only a satellite. I know that USA bashing is a popular sport the world over, but...when you realise how much that country is doing, with so little (by comparison)...it really deserves respect.

    when the best interests of society required the unification of the numerous tribes and peoples which had settled on the soil of the Roman Empire. By overthrowing the barriers between inimical families and races, ruinous internecine warfare was diminished and greater peace and harmony secured

    https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04264a.htm

    In other words, the Church promoted consensual and egalitarian marriage relations based on the free will of individual men and women. This is what Siedentop means by the Catholic “invention of individualism”.

    https://www.eurocanadian.ca/2020/04/kevin-macdonald-hail-catholic-5church-forcing-monogamy-upon-nobility.html

    Besides literal global race-mixing and gay rights what is there for the white race to be proud of?

  21. Chinese assholes know it alls – know nothing with their civilisational state oldest civilisation etc. LEARN BASIC EATING habits and HYGIENE. Hell even Africans are clean compared to these ****’*. Quit trying to be the new hegemon-it’s BORING. Invent something REALLY.

    • Agree: Tusk
    • Troll: d dan, Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
    Chinese civilisation is about seventy years old.
    , @Blinky Bill
    https://youtu.be/_KuD4sI5Efs
  22. China could feasibly go nuclear as long term prospects for the country. Not just in the senes of warheads but nuclear physics and energy industry as well, which would be beneficial for them since it would shore up their energy security risks by transferring to an industry they can have control of. Simultaneously this brings forward a threefold strategy for the future based on high-IQ science industry, domestic energy, national security.

    That being said, if China goes hard on nuclear across the board it might encourage other states to stop being losers and develop their own nuclear industries instead of being afraid of something that can’t see.

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    https://www.chinadialogue.net/UserFiles/Image/creeping/EN_map%20of%20nuclear%20stations.jpg

    Alexey Bannik, vice president of China projects at Russia's AtomStroyExport (ASE), has given the schedule for new VVER-1200 units at Tianwan and Xudabao. Construction of Tianwan unit 7 will start in May 2021, and that of Xudabao unit 3 and of Tianwan unit 8 will start five and 10 months later, respectively. The launch of the Tianwan units is scheduled for 2026 and 2027 while the third and fourth units at the Xudabao plant will both be launched in 2028.

    ASE and China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) signed the general contract for the construction of Tianwan 7 and 8 and a technical contract for two new units at Xudabao on 7 March. These contracts were prepared in accordance with the strategic package of agreements signed during a visit by Russian President Vladimir Putin to China last June. This package defines cooperation between Russia and China in the nuclear industry in the coming decades. Contracts for Tianwan 7 and 8 were signed between CNNC and Rosatom in early November marking the implementation of the framework contracts.

    ASE is the engineering division of Rosatom and Bannik’s comments appeared in an interview with the state nuclear corporation’s newspaper, Strana Rosatom, yesterday.

    "According to the contract, first concrete will be poured at Tianwan-7 in May 2021; five months later at Xudabao-3; another five months later at Tianwan-8; and another five months after that Xudabao-4," Bannik said. "That is, there will be a 10-month gap between units 7 and 8 at Tianwan, and a five-month gap between the seventh unit at Tianwan and the third unit at Xudabao, which is a new site for us. The target dates are very ambitious and meeting them will require clear and coordinated work by all the project participants."

    The construction site of Tianwan 7 and 8 is "essentially ready", Bannik said. "Now we are working on levelling it out, but we already know this area because we’ve built four units there and so we don’t need to conduct any additional surveys," he added. The Chinese side has fully prepared the Xudabao site for the construction of six blocks, two of which ASE will build, he said.

    Bannik said: "We are planning the nuclear island, issuing the technical requirements and monitoring the plant as a whole, as well as the safety concept and preparing documents for licensing. The Chinese side is responsible for designing the non-nuclear island part and supplying all the equipment for it. We will supply the main equipment of the nuclear island and some security systems. The Russians will participate in all stages of construction."

    He added: "There are many specialists in the company - they are our old friends who worked on the construction of the Tianwan units, which we are very pleased with. The division of labour at the new units is no different to that at Tianwan-3 and -4, for which the Chinese side has fully taken over the construction work. Therefore, we don't plan to bring our own resources to the extent that we need to at sites in other countries. But, perhaps, we will need specialists to work in the representative offices and on-site to oversee the construction and installation work by the Chinese side."

    ASE plans to boost the number of personnel working on its China projects, he said, "but not by much".

    "In the management company, we want to keep the number of the Chinese directorate at an optimal level. The projects for the units are similar and it is necessary to take advantage of this, and not to over-inflate it. As for representation in China, the sites are located too far from each other, in different provinces. For Xudabao, we’ll have to create a structure, almost repeating the representation in Lianyungang, at the construction site of the Tianwan NPP. That is a requirement of the contract," Bannik said.

    The VVER-1200 projects in China will differ slightly to units of the same design built in Russia, he said, owing to different soil, climate and water supply features. In addition, the Chinese customer has a number of specific requirements related to nuclear, radiation and fire safety, and environmental impact, he added without elaborating.

    Novovoronezh II-2 will be the third VVER-1200 to be commissioned, following Novovoronezh II-1 and Leningrad II-1, which were launched in 2016 and 2017, respectively.

    Rosatom describes the VVER-1200 as a Generation III+ power unit, which has a number of economic and safety advantages when compared to the previous generation (VVER-1000). It is 20% more powerful; requires 30-40% fewer operator personnel; and its operating period is twice as long, at 60 years, with the possibility of extension by an additional 20 years.

    Rosatom also has VVER-1200 construction projects in Bangladesh, Belarus, Finland and Hungary.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    China has been working on that, including thorium nuclear reactors which can't be weaponized.
  23. @Vishnugupta
    I would be very surprised if anything like this actually happens except US/UK there is no such precedent of cooperation between two nuclear states.Even the article concedes this is a small possibility...

    What are your thoughts on moving to a place like Krasnodar now that residency is just a condo away?
    Relatives are scattered around west but see writing on the wall

    “whites are racist, but the black-muslim future is worse”

    Still have property in India but another Sonia gov will result in a UC/Sikh genocide anyway..

  24. @hgv
    Slightly off-topic: doesnt the fact that it takes a nation 4.5 times its size to compete (and beat) the US speak volumes about its greatness? Imagine its power if there were 300 million white Americans, or 400, or 500...even China would then be only a satellite. I know that USA bashing is a popular sport the world over, but...when you realise how much that country is doing, with so little (by comparison)...it really deserves respect.

    You’re ignoring the time component. The US industrialised right at the start of the 20th Century whereas China did not start until the late 60’s to 70’s. This is akin to running a competitive marathon where the other party starts 60/70% into the lap and you are now neck and neck with him.

    Not really impressive if you think about it that way.

  25. L.D. says: • Website

    “ First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization.”

    Who exactly is the Chinese Isaac Newton? The Chinese Darwin? The Chinese Copernicus? The Chinese Shakespeare? The Chinese Michelangelo? The Chinese Aristotle? The Chinese Beethoven? The Chinese Cervantes?

    As far as I can’t tell they’re nowhere to be seen. And yet the pro-China enthusiasts, who incessantly crow about it supposedly having “5 000 years of uninterrupted history” would have us believe that such a nation has indeed a glorious civilisation. Give me a break.

    What strikes me about China is how utterly unimpressive its accomplishments are for a people who has been around for so long.

    But now that Russia is well on the way to becoming a vassal state to the Chinese (providing it with cheap raw materials, as the Third World country it is) Anatoly has taken it upon himself to sing the praises of the future slanted-eyed masters of his defeated nation. What a joke! Not having a country to be proud of, he seems to have decided to outsource his patriotism to his neighbours. Sad.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Perhaps, it's just his way of looking reality in the eye and trying to put the best light on a a less than optimal situation? Perhaps Russia will become to China what Canada is to the US? But the cultures and their histories are so much different. In the past Russian Eurasianists foresaw Russia as being the driving force in a greater Eurasia, but now this seems like a silly notion.
    , @Daemon
    I love this argument, it completely exposes the absolute head-up-their-ass mentality that white supremacists have at their core. Did you try to look for these people or did you just flat out write them off as something that doesnt exist before you decided to mouth off?

    The Chinese are a very inward looking people, and self-promotion is NOT their racial forte.
    Coupled with a cultural barrier that is relentlessly occident-centric, where works only exist if they have enough of an english language presence, means the VAST majority of chinese literary and scientific literature are functionally inaccessible. If something is not translated, it does not exist within the western psyche. It does not mean they and their authors do not exist. Since there is an extreme dearth of individuals who are capable of translating chinese to english while retaining the essence of these works, there is no one to judge the merit of these works and so the chinese cultural footprint in the west is effectively zero. That translates to the illusion that an entire country of 1.3b people are completely incapable of literary or artistic output and can at best only work in a factory making doodads.

    Does this feel right to you?

    Do you know a single Chinese author/philosopher/artist/scientist? Let me guess, Sun Tzu. What other work was he responsible for apart from The Art of War? You can't name one without googling. Just like how you cannot name a single chinese individual except maybe a coworker or neighbor.
    Even your poodle of an ally Japan has at most only half a dozen well-known and respected individuals and they've been at your beck and call for over half a century.

    When you dont make an effort to look, how can you make an accurate comparison?
    Because you don't want to find them. That would destroy your worldview that only whites are capable of 'innovation' and 'progress' and that your future on the top of the totem pole is assured.

    It isnt.

    , @Slimer
    Sorry, but most people would agree that this


    https://emborapets.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/54705091_xl-1.jpg


    is worth more than a thousand Isaac Newtons. Your thoughts may differ but I'm just sayin...

    , @Astuteobservor II
    Hard power beats everything else. Soft power means jack shit in the face of hard power.

    The Chinese just needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect it. They are good to go.

    And I would consider paper, gunpowder and compass to be monumental inventions of human development and history.

    China missed out on the first two industrial revolutions. Catching up during this 3rd one. Soon the 4th, AI/automation will have a head start with 5g.

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it's rise?
    , @Blinky Bill

    Who exactly is
     
    The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been. – Canute

    A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. – Clausewitz

    I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly dreaming I am a man. – Samuel Clemens

    For their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles. – Siegfried & Roy

    In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion. – Stepan Bandera


    https://i.redd.it/rmt33yfl19241.jpg
    Hello smith.

    , @thetruth
    here is something for you to start!

    -----------------------------------------
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Needham#Science_and_Civilisation_in_China

    Science and Civilisation in China by Joseph Needham
    Main article: Science and Civilisation in China

    In 1948, Needham proposed a project to the Cambridge University Press for a book on Science and Civilisation in China. Within weeks of being accepted, the project had grown to seven volumes, and it has expanded ever since. His initial collaborator was the historian Wang Ling (王玲), whom he had met in Lizhuang and obtained a position for at Trinity. The first years were devoted to compiling a list of every mechanical invention and abstract idea that had been made and conceived in China. These included cast iron, the ploughshare, the stirrup, gunpowder, printing, the magnetic compass and clockwork escapements, most of which were thought at the time to be western inventions. The first volume eventually appeared in 1954.

    The publication received widespread acclaim, which intensified to lyricism as the further volumes appeared. He wrote fifteen volumes himself, and the regular production of further volumes continued after his death in 1995. Later, Volume III was divided, so that 27 volumes have now been published. Successive volumes are published as they are completed, which means that they do not appear in the order originally contemplated in the project's prospectus.

    Needham's final organizing schema was:

    Vol. I. Introductory Orientations
    Vol. II. History of Scientific Thought
    Vol. III. Mathematics and the Sciences of the Heavens and Earth
    Vol. IV. Physics and Physical Technology
    Vol. V. Chemistry and Chemical Technology
    Vol. VI. Biology and Biological Technology
    Vol. VII. The Social Background

    See Science and Civilisation in China for a full list.

    The project is still proceeding under the guidance of the Publications Board of the Needham Research Institute, directed by Professor Mei Jianjun.[12]
    , @Anonymous (n)
    Are you a western white? If so, I hope you realize that your people are just a few decades away from complete domination by and submission to foreign elements now gathering for the final demographic push. Ethnic Russians will still have their nation state and center of political, industrial, and military power 50 years from now. Western whites like yourself will be mere chattel in what was formerly your own homelands.
  26. @L.D.
    “ First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization.”

    Who exactly is the Chinese Isaac Newton? The Chinese Darwin? The Chinese Copernicus? The Chinese Shakespeare? The Chinese Michelangelo? The Chinese Aristotle? The Chinese Beethoven? The Chinese Cervantes?

    As far as I can’t tell they’re nowhere to be seen. And yet the pro-China enthusiasts, who incessantly crow about it supposedly having “5 000 years of uninterrupted history” would have us believe that such a nation has indeed a glorious civilisation. Give me a break.

    What strikes me about China is how utterly unimpressive its accomplishments are for a people who has been around for so long.

    But now that Russia is well on the way to becoming a vassal state to the Chinese (providing it with cheap raw materials, as the Third World country it is) Anatoly has taken it upon himself to sing the praises of the future slanted-eyed masters of his defeated nation. What a joke! Not having a country to be proud of, he seems to have decided to outsource his patriotism to his neighbours. Sad.

    Perhaps, it’s just his way of looking reality in the eye and trying to put the best light on a a less than optimal situation? Perhaps Russia will become to China what Canada is to the US? But the cultures and their histories are so much different. In the past Russian Eurasianists foresaw Russia as being the driving force in a greater Eurasia, but now this seems like a silly notion.

    • Replies: @d dan

    "Perhaps Russia will become to China what Canada is to the US?"
     
    The west is very good in projection of their own thinking to China. Look, China is talking about increasing its nuclear warheads from 300 to about 1000. Even 1000 is only a fraction of what Russia and US each have, not even counting US alliances like UK, France, India or even Japan may potentially muster. Anatoly Karlin is overstating to call this "Nuclear Parity". And yet China somehow will have both the intention and capability to subjugate a nation of 6000 warheads like Russia, or to threaten and attack US?

    Many old people in China today still remember the days when China was under the EXPLICIT threats of nuclear attacks from US, and then later from Soviet. The debate of increasing nuclear warheads is totally justified and defensive in nature, in view of latest US belligerence in so many areas.

  27. I doubt China has more nukes than they let on. As Dr. Strangelove said, the entire point of a Doomsday Device is lost if you keep it a secret.

    • Replies: @lauris71
    First, just because we do not know the exact number of Chinese nukes does not mean that Pentagon does not know. And there can be many reasons why they do not make it public. Intelligence world has its own rules.
    Second, nuclear war does not start out of the blue. As mad as the US foreign policy sometimes seems to be, attacking china with decapitating strike just does not seem very probable at moment. There will be long step-by-step escalation before ICBM-s start to fly and Chinese may prefer to reveal their trump cards at the suitable time.
    Maybe the recent public discussion in China is meant to slowly prepare the world for their big announcement (that they have 1500+ warheads)? Seems logical to me - they may have estimated that the probability of nuclear strike has increased recently and thus they have to cool some heads across Pacific. But they prefer to make it slowly and in small steps..
  28. @L.D.
    “ First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization.”

    Who exactly is the Chinese Isaac Newton? The Chinese Darwin? The Chinese Copernicus? The Chinese Shakespeare? The Chinese Michelangelo? The Chinese Aristotle? The Chinese Beethoven? The Chinese Cervantes?

    As far as I can’t tell they’re nowhere to be seen. And yet the pro-China enthusiasts, who incessantly crow about it supposedly having “5 000 years of uninterrupted history” would have us believe that such a nation has indeed a glorious civilisation. Give me a break.

    What strikes me about China is how utterly unimpressive its accomplishments are for a people who has been around for so long.

    But now that Russia is well on the way to becoming a vassal state to the Chinese (providing it with cheap raw materials, as the Third World country it is) Anatoly has taken it upon himself to sing the praises of the future slanted-eyed masters of his defeated nation. What a joke! Not having a country to be proud of, he seems to have decided to outsource his patriotism to his neighbours. Sad.

    I love this argument, it completely exposes the absolute head-up-their-ass mentality that white supremacists have at their core. Did you try to look for these people or did you just flat out write them off as something that doesnt exist before you decided to mouth off?

    The Chinese are a very inward looking people, and self-promotion is NOT their racial forte.
    Coupled with a cultural barrier that is relentlessly occident-centric, where works only exist if they have enough of an english language presence, means the VAST majority of chinese literary and scientific literature are functionally inaccessible. If something is not translated, it does not exist within the western psyche. It does not mean they and their authors do not exist. Since there is an extreme dearth of individuals who are capable of translating chinese to english while retaining the essence of these works, there is no one to judge the merit of these works and so the chinese cultural footprint in the west is effectively zero. That translates to the illusion that an entire country of 1.3b people are completely incapable of literary or artistic output and can at best only work in a factory making doodads.

    Does this feel right to you?

    Do you know a single Chinese author/philosopher/artist/scientist? Let me guess, Sun Tzu. What other work was he responsible for apart from The Art of War? You can’t name one without googling. Just like how you cannot name a single chinese individual except maybe a coworker or neighbor.
    Even your poodle of an ally Japan has at most only half a dozen well-known and respected individuals and they’ve been at your beck and call for over half a century.

    When you dont make an effort to look, how can you make an accurate comparison?
    Because you don’t want to find them. That would destroy your worldview that only whites are capable of ‘innovation’ and ‘progress’ and that your future on the top of the totem pole is assured.

    It isnt.

    • Agree: dfordoom, Fluesterwitz
    • Replies: @Tusk
    It's not White peoples fault China has 0 soft power and is unable to export their history to the world.
    , @Kent Nationalist
    Your argument takes no account of the fact that Japanese culture is extremely popular in the rest of the world. Even Korean culture (although in more demotic forms like K-pop/TV serials) is popular in the rest of the world.
  29. @Mr. Hack
    Perhaps, it's just his way of looking reality in the eye and trying to put the best light on a a less than optimal situation? Perhaps Russia will become to China what Canada is to the US? But the cultures and their histories are so much different. In the past Russian Eurasianists foresaw Russia as being the driving force in a greater Eurasia, but now this seems like a silly notion.

    “Perhaps Russia will become to China what Canada is to the US?”

    The west is very good in projection of their own thinking to China. Look, China is talking about increasing its nuclear warheads from 300 to about 1000. Even 1000 is only a fraction of what Russia and US each have, not even counting US alliances like UK, France, India or even Japan may potentially muster. Anatoly Karlin is overstating to call this “Nuclear Parity”. And yet China somehow will have both the intention and capability to subjugate a nation of 6000 warheads like Russia, or to threaten and attack US?

    Many old people in China today still remember the days when China was under the EXPLICIT threats of nuclear attacks from US, and then later from Soviet. The debate of increasing nuclear warheads is totally justified and defensive in nature, in view of latest US belligerence in so many areas.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I don't see how your reply to my comment addresses any of the points that I brought up?
  30. @songbird
    I'm trying to understand why they would be openly discussing this. I guess while warheads can be hidden, it is hard to hide many of their delivery mechanisms, like ballistic subs. Therefore, perhaps it eases tensions slightly, rather than if they never mentioned it, while building up visible things like silos.

    Still, I'm lukewarm about the idea. As, I mentioned before - I think the theory of MAD is obsolete and mistaken. It treats a country like there is no elite political class, living in the major cities, who would be terrified if you dropped a warhead on their condos, and favorite bistros, and theaters, let alone on their heads. And suppose somehow they got lucky, escaped the radiation and shockwave - do you think they would enjoy contemplating what the minorities who survived the strike would do, when the gibs stopped?

    I wonder what the cost of this build-up would be. I'm guessing it could not be done on the cheap, and that there are other more sensible investments, like quality propaganda, or technology. I don't think it is worth it, unless they are considering some off-the-label use, other than MAD.

    Would a new Cold War be good for the West? Personally, I don't think so. We are in a pretty perilous situation right now, without a major power actively promoting a fifth column.

    As, I mentioned before – I think the theory of MAD is obsolete and mistaken. It treats a country like there is no elite political class, living in the major cities, who would be terrified if you dropped a warhead on their condos, and favorite bistros, and theaters, let alone on their heads.

    This is why “nuclear parity” isn’t really necessary, just “nuclear capability.” Even if only a few nukes have the capability to hit a major American city, that is still enough to scare elites into avoiding nuclear war.

    However, the advantage of building a larger arsenal is redundancy; you need to have enough separate delivery systems to make deactivating them all implausible. That would include a multitude of separate delivery methods (ICBMs, aerial bombs, and submarines) but increasing the total number of necessary targets also helps.

  31. @Daemon
    I love this argument, it completely exposes the absolute head-up-their-ass mentality that white supremacists have at their core. Did you try to look for these people or did you just flat out write them off as something that doesnt exist before you decided to mouth off?

    The Chinese are a very inward looking people, and self-promotion is NOT their racial forte.
    Coupled with a cultural barrier that is relentlessly occident-centric, where works only exist if they have enough of an english language presence, means the VAST majority of chinese literary and scientific literature are functionally inaccessible. If something is not translated, it does not exist within the western psyche. It does not mean they and their authors do not exist. Since there is an extreme dearth of individuals who are capable of translating chinese to english while retaining the essence of these works, there is no one to judge the merit of these works and so the chinese cultural footprint in the west is effectively zero. That translates to the illusion that an entire country of 1.3b people are completely incapable of literary or artistic output and can at best only work in a factory making doodads.

    Does this feel right to you?

    Do you know a single Chinese author/philosopher/artist/scientist? Let me guess, Sun Tzu. What other work was he responsible for apart from The Art of War? You can't name one without googling. Just like how you cannot name a single chinese individual except maybe a coworker or neighbor.
    Even your poodle of an ally Japan has at most only half a dozen well-known and respected individuals and they've been at your beck and call for over half a century.

    When you dont make an effort to look, how can you make an accurate comparison?
    Because you don't want to find them. That would destroy your worldview that only whites are capable of 'innovation' and 'progress' and that your future on the top of the totem pole is assured.

    It isnt.

    It’s not White peoples fault China has 0 soft power and is unable to export their history to the world.

    • Replies: @Daemon
    You are correct, it isnt the west's job to promote China. My peeve is pretending that because you don't see the merit's of the chinese people, it somehow magically doesnt exist.
  32. @L.D.
    “ First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization.”

    Who exactly is the Chinese Isaac Newton? The Chinese Darwin? The Chinese Copernicus? The Chinese Shakespeare? The Chinese Michelangelo? The Chinese Aristotle? The Chinese Beethoven? The Chinese Cervantes?

    As far as I can’t tell they’re nowhere to be seen. And yet the pro-China enthusiasts, who incessantly crow about it supposedly having “5 000 years of uninterrupted history” would have us believe that such a nation has indeed a glorious civilisation. Give me a break.

    What strikes me about China is how utterly unimpressive its accomplishments are for a people who has been around for so long.

    But now that Russia is well on the way to becoming a vassal state to the Chinese (providing it with cheap raw materials, as the Third World country it is) Anatoly has taken it upon himself to sing the praises of the future slanted-eyed masters of his defeated nation. What a joke! Not having a country to be proud of, he seems to have decided to outsource his patriotism to his neighbours. Sad.

    Sorry, but most people would agree that this

    is worth more than a thousand Isaac Newtons. Your thoughts may differ but I’m just sayin…

  33. L.D. says: • Website

    “ I love this argument, it completely exposes the absolute head-up-their-ass mentality that white supremacists have at their core.“

    You mad, bruh? Yes, I am indeed what fools would call a “White supremacist”, being someone who acknowledges the dazzling and overwhelming civilizacional supremacy of the European peoples over everybody else. What else on Earth should I be? A “CHINK SUPREMACIST” as it seems to be your case? LOL

    “Did you try to look for these people or did you just flat out write them off as something that doesnt exist before you decided to mouth off?”

    English not even being my native language I assure you I have a way deeper and wider understanding of Western civilisation than you, dear monoglot American.

    “ When you dont make an effort to look, how can you make an accurate comparison?
    Because you don’t want to find them.”

    My initial comment was based on the simple observation that the Chinese equivalents of the countless towering minds we have in the West in all areas of the human endeavours are nowhere to be found. By writing a shrill passive-aggressive reply with hundreds of words and failing to provide A SINGLE EXAMPLE of what you swear to us that does in fact exist (great Chinese scientists, philosophers*, composers, writers and artists on par with what we have given to the world) you have just made my point for myself: if the chinks had their own geniuses we would have heard from them already. QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM.**

    *I’ve read the Analects and the Tao Te Ching, works generally acknowledged as the two pillars of the traditional Chinese thought. The former is a collection of tedious, pompous and uninsightful moral pronouncements and the latter is pure mystical mumble-jumble. Neither work would have been recognised as philosophy by Plato nor Aristotle. If the so-called Chinese philosophy is anything to go by, it’s no surprise we don’t hear about the great Chinese minds: Occam Razor’s: they didn’t produce many of them – if any.

    **You actually remind me of some Afrocentrists I occasionally bump into here on the internet. Just like you do with the chinks, they vehemently swear by Wakanda that Africa too has its Homers, its Leibnitzes and its Schopenhauers while also failing to enlighten us with any examples. I assume the reason for that is the same in both cases. How do you say WE WAZ GENIUSES in chink-speak? LOL

  34. @Octavian
    I've always suspected that China's strategic toolbox is rather greater than it appears.

    However, I would not be surprised in the slightest to learn that they have focused resources on creating a framework for a rapid expansion of the number of warheads rather than on the weapons themselves.

    I imagine that they would not wish to unduly alarm their neighbors during the 'peaceful rise'. I also think this was a deliberate attempt to keep a low profile and stay away from any pressure to engage in arms limitations talks.

    But now that they are clearly the crab that has climbed the side of the bucket the most - now having an anemic ability to project strategic terror is a liability.

    Nuclear weapons are a relatively economical way to avoid large-scale, conventional wars - but they are only truly effective as deterrence if their existence is public and if their perceived capabilities are seen to be terrifying.

    If I were a patriotic Chinese, I would be extremely in favor of expanding the nation's nuclear capabilities as the surest way to existentially protect my civilization. Especially since, as a patriotic Chinese of course, I would believe a lot of very interesting theories about the foreign origin of the Great Virus. I would also viewed with mistrust any domestic opposition to expanding the nuclear arsenal.

    Hu Xijin's position seems eminently reasonable, and since he is such an important figure in the Chinese tower of status, I can't imagine that he is alone in his views.

    I would expect to see the continued public expansion of their strategic toolbox along with the continued, covert expansion (which I would not see -grin-) of their biological and chemical capabilities.

    Agreed, minus the coronavirus bit. It’s pretty ridiculous for China to possess a less powerful long range ICBM force than the likes of Britain and France. In fact, if the public information regarding the Chinese nuclear deterrent is more or less correct, US military planners may feel somewhat confident of being able to take out the vast majority of it via a carefully orchestrated first strike. It seems rather foolish to be in the process of building up the world’s foremost economic power only to leave yourself with a very obvious and easily fixed Achilles’ heel.

  35. @Tusk
    It's not White peoples fault China has 0 soft power and is unable to export their history to the world.

    You are correct, it isnt the west’s job to promote China. My peeve is pretending that because you don’t see the merit’s of the chinese people, it somehow magically doesnt exist.

  36. @d dan

    "Perhaps Russia will become to China what Canada is to the US?"
     
    The west is very good in projection of their own thinking to China. Look, China is talking about increasing its nuclear warheads from 300 to about 1000. Even 1000 is only a fraction of what Russia and US each have, not even counting US alliances like UK, France, India or even Japan may potentially muster. Anatoly Karlin is overstating to call this "Nuclear Parity". And yet China somehow will have both the intention and capability to subjugate a nation of 6000 warheads like Russia, or to threaten and attack US?

    Many old people in China today still remember the days when China was under the EXPLICIT threats of nuclear attacks from US, and then later from Soviet. The debate of increasing nuclear warheads is totally justified and defensive in nature, in view of latest US belligerence in so many areas.

    I don’t see how your reply to my comment addresses any of the points that I brought up?

    • Replies: @d dan

    "I don’t see how your reply to my comment addresses any of the points that I brought up?"
     
    Sigh. Really?

    Look, Canada is essentially a semi-vassal of US. US can threaten, coerce, bully or command Canada in many areas and in many ways. Remember the tariffs on Canadian steel on "national security" ground by Trump? A mid-level US official can just send a paper and have Canada arrested Huawei CFO, causing major diplomatic rift with loses of billions $ of exports and two Canadians arrested in China. The latest incident is Trump stopping 3M export of face masks to Canada. Now, imagine a nation of 200 (or even 1000) nuclear warheads doing any of these actions to a nation of 6000.

    It is fine if you disagree on my points - we just have to agree to disagree. But you fails to see how my reply addresses your points?

  37. @Mr. Hack
    I don't see how your reply to my comment addresses any of the points that I brought up?

    “I don’t see how your reply to my comment addresses any of the points that I brought up?”

    Sigh. Really?

    Look, Canada is essentially a semi-vassal of US. US can threaten, coerce, bully or command Canada in many areas and in many ways. Remember the tariffs on Canadian steel on “national security” ground by Trump? A mid-level US official can just send a paper and have Canada arrested Huawei CFO, causing major diplomatic rift with loses of billions $ of exports and two Canadians arrested in China. The latest incident is Trump stopping 3M export of face masks to Canada. Now, imagine a nation of 200 (or even 1000) nuclear warheads doing any of these actions to a nation of 6000.

    It is fine if you disagree on my points – we just have to agree to disagree. But you fails to see how my reply addresses your points?

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    China has other ways of flexing its muscles vis-a-vis Russia than trying to match it with nuclear weapons. More and more Chinese are settling in the Russian Far East, taking over its agriculture, forestry and general business establishments, where native Russians dread to go and settle. How long do you feel that this can continue before China controls these areas, if not dejure then defacto? A lot of these areas were originally Chinese and were absorbed by Russia when the Chinese feel that they were to weak to complain, but going forward?
  38. @L.D.
    “ First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization.”

    Who exactly is the Chinese Isaac Newton? The Chinese Darwin? The Chinese Copernicus? The Chinese Shakespeare? The Chinese Michelangelo? The Chinese Aristotle? The Chinese Beethoven? The Chinese Cervantes?

    As far as I can’t tell they’re nowhere to be seen. And yet the pro-China enthusiasts, who incessantly crow about it supposedly having “5 000 years of uninterrupted history” would have us believe that such a nation has indeed a glorious civilisation. Give me a break.

    What strikes me about China is how utterly unimpressive its accomplishments are for a people who has been around for so long.

    But now that Russia is well on the way to becoming a vassal state to the Chinese (providing it with cheap raw materials, as the Third World country it is) Anatoly has taken it upon himself to sing the praises of the future slanted-eyed masters of his defeated nation. What a joke! Not having a country to be proud of, he seems to have decided to outsource his patriotism to his neighbours. Sad.

    Hard power beats everything else. Soft power means jack shit in the face of hard power.

    The Chinese just needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect it. They are good to go.

    And I would consider paper, gunpowder and compass to be monumental inventions of human development and history.

    China missed out on the first two industrial revolutions. Catching up during this 3rd one. Soon the 4th, AI/automation will have a head start with 5g.

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?

    • Agree: Tor597
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives.
     
    If you look at the current state of the West it's pretty obvious that there's not much to be proud of. We achieved a lot in civilisational terms but we seem to be intent on flushing it all down the toilet. In recent times the West's greatest achievement has been to recognise the right of men in dresses to use the ladies' room.

    So it's obvious that a lot of white people are only able to feel good about themselves by clinging to the notion of white superiority. We might be a decadent declining civilisation but muh creativity!

    All decadent declining civilisations do this. When the Greeks discovered that the Romans were now their masters they consoled themselves with muh creativity as well.
    , @EldnahYm

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?
     
    That's not really a convincing argument. By the same logic, why would the U.S. spend trillions to attack Iraq if it wasn't a threat? Well, incompetence is one answer.
  39. @The Alarmist

    The idea that any nation can salvo launch hundreds of ICBMs ( most of which have been sitting around in silos or sub missile rooms for years) and be able to hit with precision another nations entire command and control centers and retaliatory weapons was one of the most demented doctrines of the Cold War.
     
    1) Nukes were used to get around the need for precision;
    2) A lot of talented people were dedicated to making it workable;
    3) Nobody in the business kidded themselves that every target would be hit;
    4) To assure that #3 was not going to be a problem, multiple warheads from multiple delivery systems were dedicated to a given target;
    5) Decapitation was desired, but counterforce targetting was paramount;
    6) Lots of Intel resources were dedicated to finding the adversary's mobile systems and C3I;
    7) The fact that one couldn't guarantee taking out all of the adversary's systems and C3I removed the temptation to attempt a First Strike;
    8) Massive investments were made to keep our own C3I backed up and survivable;
    9) Delivery systems were periodically pulled from service and test fired to evaluate how they might degrade over time.

    It may seem demented, but it was thought through thoroughly, and it seemed to keep the peace better than having a unipower blustering its way through the world with nothing to check it.

    2) A lot of talented people were dedicated to making it workable;

    When you look at the recent developments re COVID19, …

  40. Let us do a little bit of sci-fi.

    Suppose Taiwan goes full steam ahead THIS year in seeking independence. Suppose some small but significant countries officially recognize them, say Denmark. Part of their rationale might be that the global economy not being able to come back, there ain’t much money to be earned from Chinese market, and Bannon. And the moral angle, from their point of view.

    Chinese actively prepares for invasion.

    US drops a small nuke in the strait.

    What next? The MAD is probably going to be exposed as just a pretension.

    In the THREE BODIES series, Liu Cixing talked about this. It can be extremely impossible for you to go all out when it simply means suicide to yourself and severe damage to the other guy, given that the alternative is likely that you can still live as a loser.

    For the weaker party to escape this dire situation, he must make his willingness to die loud and clear.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Or build 1000 nukes with the ICBMs to carry them.

    And who told you that China has to retaliate immediately? Why couldn't China build enough nukes first?

    Wishful thinking when it comes to nukes is fucking planet ending serious.

    And shit, what kinda moron would one need to be to think USA is willing to go back to the stone age for Taiwan? American elites willing to live like Neanderthals in the future for Taiwan? Piss off.

  41. L.D. says: • Website

    ”The Chinese just needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect it. They are good to go.”

    Let me correct this sentence for you: The Chinese Communist Party (Did the chinks invent Communism by the way?) needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect ITSELF against the Chinese people and KEEP ITSELF in power. Good luck with that in the long run.

    “And I would consider paper, gunpowder and compass to be monumental inventions of human development and history.”

    You’re absolutely right. Problem is, 3 inventions in 5 thousand years of history is not exactly a spectacular track record, right? And what’s more important, you fail to grasp the essential, epistemological difference between technology and SCIENCE. Several civilisations have reached relatively sophisticated levels of technology but only the West came up with what what we define as science. The chinks didn’t invent calculus, chemistry, physics nor the modern medicine. We did.

    “China missed out on the first two industrial revolutions. Catching up during this 3rd one. Soon the 4th, AI/automation will have a head start with 5g.”

    As Shakespeare put it, PAST IS PROLOGUE. If the chinks were capable of a scientific revolution of their own they would have done it by now. And yet till 1978, when Deng started modernising the country (that is to say when they started adopting everything WE invented and opened themselves to OUR capital, after the disaster of Maoism), China was as backward as Africa. As to the notion that China will soon be a civilizacional beacon and will conquer the world… where have we heard that before? Wasn’t the Soviet Union going to be exactly that according to the talking heads in the 60s? And then didn’t they say the same about Japan in the 80s? Now the eggheads have a new shiny object to toy with: China. Well, China is a confederation of peoples speaking a multitude of different languages, being kept together by a totalitarian state. Like I said before, good luck to CCP in staying in power and keeping the country from breaking apart into several nations in the long run.

    “Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?”

    The adjective “retarded” would seem more aptly used to describe a civilisation that invented 3 thing in 5 thousand years and which until 1978 had a per capita income lower than Somalia, don’t you think? And as to the US supposedly being in the course of “waging full spectrum war” on the chinks: WE CAN ONLY WISH. I couldn’t care less about any kind of anti-Chinese propaganda from the American government, I speak for myself: I don’t want to live in a world remotely influenced by the Chinese in general nor by the CCP in particular. The chinks are VILE people: corrupt, authoritarian and vulgarly materialistic. It’s understandable that a guy like Anatoly, being Russian, fantasises about living in a global Chinkocracy, as his people have been slaves since forever and they can’t conceive life not being under someone’s boot. But why free white men would be waxing lyrical and having widely unrealistic wet-dreams about being ruled by a race of extremely physically unattractive yellow little thieves is utterly beyond me.

    • Replies: @yakushimaru

    Let me correct this sentence for you: The Chinese Communist Party (Did the chinks invent Communism by the way?) needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect ITSELF against the Chinese people and KEEP ITSELF in power.
     
    It is people not living here exhibiting most intense hate out of ideology and whatnot.

    I suggest you pay more attention to your own country. Of course you won't. People like you, being a nationalist, is just having an excuse so they can blame the foreigners.

    We have neolibs who is war plus whatever. Then neocons who is war plus whatever. Now we are seeing neo version of nationalists. They are war with different excuses. You are being played by your own master and you are so free. You think.

    , @Astuteobservor II
    It is a pain in the ass to reply to long ass comments on my phone.

    Anyone who tries to separate the govt and it's governed people are bitch asses who can't handle responsibility. Kindly fuck off with the bullshit that you hate the Chinese govt but not the Chinese. So what if you are a racist? Owned it bitch.

    Those 3 you dismissed so easily essentially built the human civilization. Without paper think humans could retain and use knowledge so easily? Gunpowder took war to a whole new level. Compass allowed the Europeans to colonize almost the entire earth with a few hold outs like China.

    I have no idea who came up with the scientific method. No arguments from me here. I am sure Arab historians would like a chat. Not gonna Google just for this comment. But to dismissed those 3 Chinese inventions so off handily, wtf were you smoking?

    I fully agree no country is a civilizational beacon or able to conquer the world. Whomever espouses that idea of the Chinese is as stupid as the Americans who thinks they are exceptional. But first mover advantages of the coming AI and automation will give huge advantages to China.

    I doubt anyone dreams of being ruled by the Chinese or white men or any other. Why do you project everything bad that you can think of onto the Chinese without them doing anything? Define your world? USA or the entire world? If former, sure. If latter, bitch, you are shit out of luck, as that is not in your control. The Chinese are vile? Retard, as an American, you are trying to point fingers? We have been invading n killing other people non fucking stop for the last few decades. Have some self awareness. If truly curious, Google how many countries we have invaded since 1945 and how many people have died as the result.

    Retarded put downs are retarded put downs. It means stupid. Racism is 100% OK, just don't try to put it on a pedestal.

    Why are you so scare that China would have nuclear parity? You want to nuke China?
    , @AaronB
    If you read the Tao Teh Ching, you might want to consider that China is a different "kind" of civilization.

    And that's s good thing, that the world has different experiments in living.

    The West is about accomplishing tremendous things, organizing life around the need to accomplish, creating immense pressure to accomplish - and the results have been tremendous, if that's your kind of thing.

    China made a different experiment in living, based more on the Tao Teh Ching. And that book is against accomplishment, achievement, striving, struggling, trying to be superior, etc. It says be like water, which flows to the lowest places.

    Obviously a civilization that writes a book like that isn't going to produce the kind of geniuses the West is so good at, but it might produce a more refined and enjoyable way of living - if that's your kind of thing.

    Different types of people in the world.

    Sadly, modern China has abandoned its old way of doing things and is today just a cheap copy of the worst of the West, chiefly America. Astonishingly, it's actually worse than America on those things that make America awful.

    Nothing is more sad than poor, desperate people here seeing China as an alternative to America - a product of the human desire for hope, which reality cannot conquer.
  42. @d dan

    "I don’t see how your reply to my comment addresses any of the points that I brought up?"
     
    Sigh. Really?

    Look, Canada is essentially a semi-vassal of US. US can threaten, coerce, bully or command Canada in many areas and in many ways. Remember the tariffs on Canadian steel on "national security" ground by Trump? A mid-level US official can just send a paper and have Canada arrested Huawei CFO, causing major diplomatic rift with loses of billions $ of exports and two Canadians arrested in China. The latest incident is Trump stopping 3M export of face masks to Canada. Now, imagine a nation of 200 (or even 1000) nuclear warheads doing any of these actions to a nation of 6000.

    It is fine if you disagree on my points - we just have to agree to disagree. But you fails to see how my reply addresses your points?

    China has other ways of flexing its muscles vis-a-vis Russia than trying to match it with nuclear weapons. More and more Chinese are settling in the Russian Far East, taking over its agriculture, forestry and general business establishments, where native Russians dread to go and settle. How long do you feel that this can continue before China controls these areas, if not dejure then defacto? A lot of these areas were originally Chinese and were absorbed by Russia when the Chinese feel that they were to weak to complain, but going forward?

    • Replies: @L.D.
    You’re right. By the looks of it, Russia’s future seems to be to turn into China’s bitch, converting itself into an economic appendix of China and having its Far East colonized and perhaps even politically annexed by the chinks. Considering what the Russians did to their European neighbours in the 20th century, such prospects really please me. They like to talk tough to smaller nations, let them have a taste of their own poison: Karma is a bitch. 😂😂😂
    , @d dan

    "China has other ways of flexing its muscles vis-a-vis Russia than trying to match it with nuclear weapons... "
     
    It’s not Chinese people fault that you have 0 confidence in Russian and too lazy/stupid to understand Chinese. Russian are intelligent and strong enough to defend their interests, care about their land more than you do, and know more about Chinese to deal with them.

    As I said in my first comment to you: you are projecting too much of your thinking onto Chinese. By your reasoning, Canada should worry even more about US: since US has even more ways to flex its muscles, and US DID actually invade Canada before. Furthermore, unlike Russia, Canada has no nuke to defend itself. If ancient land ownership is a factor, than I suggest white people should also pay more attention that Native Americans, Eskimos, Hawaiians, and aborigines never ever become too strong anywhere than worrying about Chinese in Russian.

  43. Certain retards are starting to suggest China needs to pay off Taiwan’s debt inherited from the “white guard” govt that got defeated by the “reds”.
    https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/historic-chinese-bonds-trump-leverage-beijing

    One can imagine Beijing officials reacting thirty seconds later with trillion dollar smiles: “We are so glad our partners in Washington finally admit that Taiwan is our territory. Of course we will pay their debts. In fact, here is the first chunk. All foreign personel will please leave the Chinese territory of Taiwan within the next 48 hours.”

  44. L.D. says: • Website
    @Mr. Hack
    China has other ways of flexing its muscles vis-a-vis Russia than trying to match it with nuclear weapons. More and more Chinese are settling in the Russian Far East, taking over its agriculture, forestry and general business establishments, where native Russians dread to go and settle. How long do you feel that this can continue before China controls these areas, if not dejure then defacto? A lot of these areas were originally Chinese and were absorbed by Russia when the Chinese feel that they were to weak to complain, but going forward?

    You’re right. By the looks of it, Russia’s future seems to be to turn into China’s bitch, converting itself into an economic appendix of China and having its Far East colonized and perhaps even politically annexed by the chinks. Considering what the Russians did to their European neighbours in the 20th century, such prospects really please me. They like to talk tough to smaller nations, let them have a taste of their own poison: Karma is a bitch. 😂😂😂

  45. @L.D.
    ”The Chinese just needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect it. They are good to go.”

    Let me correct this sentence for you: The Chinese Communist Party (Did the chinks invent Communism by the way?) needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect ITSELF against the Chinese people and KEEP ITSELF in power. Good luck with that in the long run.

    “And I would consider paper, gunpowder and compass to be monumental inventions of human development and history.”

    You’re absolutely right. Problem is, 3 inventions in 5 thousand years of history is not exactly a spectacular track record, right? And what’s more important, you fail to grasp the essential, epistemological difference between technology and SCIENCE. Several civilisations have reached relatively sophisticated levels of technology but only the West came up with what what we define as science. The chinks didn’t invent calculus, chemistry, physics nor the modern medicine. We did.

    “China missed out on the first two industrial revolutions. Catching up during this 3rd one. Soon the 4th, AI/automation will have a head start with 5g.”

    As Shakespeare put it, PAST IS PROLOGUE. If the chinks were capable of a scientific revolution of their own they would have done it by now. And yet till 1978, when Deng started modernising the country (that is to say when they started adopting everything WE invented and opened themselves to OUR capital, after the disaster of Maoism), China was as backward as Africa. As to the notion that China will soon be a civilizacional beacon and will conquer the world... where have we heard that before? Wasn’t the Soviet Union going to be exactly that according to the talking heads in the 60s? And then didn’t they say the same about Japan in the 80s? Now the eggheads have a new shiny object to toy with: China. Well, China is a confederation of peoples speaking a multitude of different languages, being kept together by a totalitarian state. Like I said before, good luck to CCP in staying in power and keeping the country from breaking apart into several nations in the long run.

    “Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?”

    The adjective “retarded” would seem more aptly used to describe a civilisation that invented 3 thing in 5 thousand years and which until 1978 had a per capita income lower than Somalia, don’t you think? And as to the US supposedly being in the course of “waging full spectrum war” on the chinks: WE CAN ONLY WISH. I couldn’t care less about any kind of anti-Chinese propaganda from the American government, I speak for myself: I don’t want to live in a world remotely influenced by the Chinese in general nor by the CCP in particular. The chinks are VILE people: corrupt, authoritarian and vulgarly materialistic. It’s understandable that a guy like Anatoly, being Russian, fantasises about living in a global Chinkocracy, as his people have been slaves since forever and they can’t conceive life not being under someone’s boot. But why free white men would be waxing lyrical and having widely unrealistic wet-dreams about being ruled by a race of extremely physically unattractive yellow little thieves is utterly beyond me.

    Let me correct this sentence for you: The Chinese Communist Party (Did the chinks invent Communism by the way?) needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect ITSELF against the Chinese people and KEEP ITSELF in power.

    It is people not living here exhibiting most intense hate out of ideology and whatnot.

    I suggest you pay more attention to your own country. Of course you won’t. People like you, being a nationalist, is just having an excuse so they can blame the foreigners.

    We have neolibs who is war plus whatever. Then neocons who is war plus whatever. Now we are seeing neo version of nationalists. They are war with different excuses. You are being played by your own master and you are so free. You think.

    • Replies: @L.D.
    “ It is people not living here exhibiting most intense hate out of ideology and whatnot.”

    For the record, I’m European. And I don’t need any ideology to dislike, despise and distrust these creatures, I just need some common sense. It’s not us who’s pouring into their shitty country and trying to subvert it from within, it’s the other way round. These people don’t have plans to be a benign power and if you think otherwise the joke is on you.

    “ I suggest you pay more attention to your own country. Of course you won’t. People like you, being a nationalist, is just having an excuse so they can blame the foreigners.”

    I suggest you do the same. Pace Ron Unz’s crazy conspiracy theory, the flu devastating the world’s economy did come from a lab in f*cking Wuhan, in chinkland. (Look for a YouTube video called I Found The Source of Coronavirus, by youtuber laowhy86). Do we even have a parallel in world history for what’s happening now? We should never have allowed any transfer of OUR technology to those morons. And it’s comical to see you defending the chinks and in the same breath talking about “blaming foreigners” in negative terms. The Chinese are known to be anything but xenophobic uh? 😂

    “ You are being played by your own master and you are so free. You think.”

    You’re right to suggest that we’re not free: we haven’t been for a long time now, as we live under ZOG, but you’re a fool if you want to get rid of it just to to live under the boot of the CCP. Would you like to replace your current Semite masters with chink ones? Really?

    , @Blinky Bill
    You are replying to this guy : https://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=Smith. He comments under several different handles, the most common one been smith also HongkongHibernian and Sol. But he always maintains the same distinctive style. His primary purpose is to derail the thread through trolling. Don't take the bait please. Several of us have had issues with him in the past.
  46. @Mr. Hack
    China has other ways of flexing its muscles vis-a-vis Russia than trying to match it with nuclear weapons. More and more Chinese are settling in the Russian Far East, taking over its agriculture, forestry and general business establishments, where native Russians dread to go and settle. How long do you feel that this can continue before China controls these areas, if not dejure then defacto? A lot of these areas were originally Chinese and were absorbed by Russia when the Chinese feel that they were to weak to complain, but going forward?

    “China has other ways of flexing its muscles vis-a-vis Russia than trying to match it with nuclear weapons… “

    It’s not Chinese people fault that you have 0 confidence in Russian and too lazy/stupid to understand Chinese. Russian are intelligent and strong enough to defend their interests, care about their land more than you do, and know more about Chinese to deal with them.

    As I said in my first comment to you: you are projecting too much of your thinking onto Chinese. By your reasoning, Canada should worry even more about US: since US has even more ways to flex its muscles, and US DID actually invade Canada before. Furthermore, unlike Russia, Canada has no nuke to defend itself. If ancient land ownership is a factor, than I suggest white people should also pay more attention that Native Americans, Eskimos, Hawaiians, and aborigines never ever become too strong anywhere than worrying about Chinese in Russian.

    • Replies: @d dan

    "If ancient land ownership is a factor, than I suggest white people should also pay more attention that Native Americans, Eskimos, Hawaiians, and aborigines never ever become too strong anywhere than worrying about Chinese in Russian."
     
    Forgot to mention Mexicans in California, Nevada, etc since those lands were annexed through war of aggression against Mexico.
  47. This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality that his pwecious GloboHomo ZOGocracy (which he conflates with the civilization of Periclean Athens, lel) is collapsing spectacularly before everyone’s eyes.

    I’d like to move things back on track by declaring my appreciation for all the thoughtful comments and commentators here, especially on a topic as momentous as the global balance of power in strategic nuclear forces. I find the theory that the Chinese nuclear arsenal could actually be in the low four figures to be quite compelling, based on the bravado its shown over the past two decades, starting roughly in 2005 with the “Anti-Secession Law” that committed itself to military intervention in Taiwan, to its seizure of Scarborough Shoal against US treaty ally the Philippines, to its defiant construction of artificial islands that could be easily decimated by the USN. These are not the sort of actions undertaken by a country that can be shut down with a decapitation strike.

    • Replies: @Amerimutt Golems


    This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality that his pwecious GloboHomo ZOGocracy (which he conflates with the civilization of Periclean Athens, lel) is collapsing spectacularly before everyone’s eyes.

     

    Pretenders are not uncommon. The Internet isn't for the undiscerning.

    BTW white supremacist is a slur and a tool of censorship.
    , @d dan

    "This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality..."
     
    Agree. Maybe the author's use of "nuclear parity" triggers those dumb ass to swarm here, contributing nothing to the discussion. Look: how can China achieve "parity" in anything to any white country. That's simply unacceptable.

    "I find the theory that the Chinese nuclear arsenal could actually be in the low four figures to be quite compelling..."
     
    From China's point of view, it is important to find out what foreigners think about 1000-nuke China. Like playing chess, you don't make a move unless you consider what others will do. The main countries to look out are the reactions of Russia, US, Japan and India.

    Also, a smaller stockpile makes it easier to maintain technological edge and upgrading. China and Russia currently have better missile technologies than US, so part of US quantitative advantage can be mitigated through better accuracy and multi-entry vehicle.

    It was also reported somewhere that China is the ONLY country that still deploy hydrogen bombs among the five "hydrogen bomb capable" countries. I don't know how accurate is this, but it fits well with China "diversity" strategy.

  48. @The Alarmist

    The idea that any nation can salvo launch hundreds of ICBMs ( most of which have been sitting around in silos or sub missile rooms for years) and be able to hit with precision another nations entire command and control centers and retaliatory weapons was one of the most demented doctrines of the Cold War.
     
    1) Nukes were used to get around the need for precision;
    2) A lot of talented people were dedicated to making it workable;
    3) Nobody in the business kidded themselves that every target would be hit;
    4) To assure that #3 was not going to be a problem, multiple warheads from multiple delivery systems were dedicated to a given target;
    5) Decapitation was desired, but counterforce targetting was paramount;
    6) Lots of Intel resources were dedicated to finding the adversary's mobile systems and C3I;
    7) The fact that one couldn't guarantee taking out all of the adversary's systems and C3I removed the temptation to attempt a First Strike;
    8) Massive investments were made to keep our own C3I backed up and survivable;
    9) Delivery systems were periodically pulled from service and test fired to evaluate how they might degrade over time.

    It may seem demented, but it was thought through thoroughly, and it seemed to keep the peace better than having a unipower blustering its way through the world with nothing to check it.

    It may seem demented, but it was thought through thoroughly, and it seemed to keep the peace better than having a unipower blustering its way through the world with nothing to check it.

    Yep. I felt a whole lot safer during the Cold War than I do now. The Balance of Terror worked.

    • Thanks: The Alarmist
  49. @d dan

    "China has other ways of flexing its muscles vis-a-vis Russia than trying to match it with nuclear weapons... "
     
    It’s not Chinese people fault that you have 0 confidence in Russian and too lazy/stupid to understand Chinese. Russian are intelligent and strong enough to defend their interests, care about their land more than you do, and know more about Chinese to deal with them.

    As I said in my first comment to you: you are projecting too much of your thinking onto Chinese. By your reasoning, Canada should worry even more about US: since US has even more ways to flex its muscles, and US DID actually invade Canada before. Furthermore, unlike Russia, Canada has no nuke to defend itself. If ancient land ownership is a factor, than I suggest white people should also pay more attention that Native Americans, Eskimos, Hawaiians, and aborigines never ever become too strong anywhere than worrying about Chinese in Russian.

    “If ancient land ownership is a factor, than I suggest white people should also pay more attention that Native Americans, Eskimos, Hawaiians, and aborigines never ever become too strong anywhere than worrying about Chinese in Russian.”

    Forgot to mention Mexicans in California, Nevada, etc since those lands were annexed through war of aggression against Mexico.

  50. Why does China need that many, wiping out Washington, New York and Israel means the empire has ceased to exist. The rest of the areas will split up because the only thing keeping the empire together is the imperial elite.

  51. @Astuteobservor II
    Hard power beats everything else. Soft power means jack shit in the face of hard power.

    The Chinese just needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect it. They are good to go.

    And I would consider paper, gunpowder and compass to be monumental inventions of human development and history.

    China missed out on the first two industrial revolutions. Catching up during this 3rd one. Soon the 4th, AI/automation will have a head start with 5g.

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it's rise?

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives.

    If you look at the current state of the West it’s pretty obvious that there’s not much to be proud of. We achieved a lot in civilisational terms but we seem to be intent on flushing it all down the toilet. In recent times the West’s greatest achievement has been to recognise the right of men in dresses to use the ladies’ room.

    So it’s obvious that a lot of white people are only able to feel good about themselves by clinging to the notion of white superiority. We might be a decadent declining civilisation but muh creativity!

    All decadent declining civilisations do this. When the Greeks discovered that the Romans were now their masters they consoled themselves with muh creativity as well.

    • Replies: @L.D.
    ” We achieved a lot in civilisational terms but we seem to be intent on flushing it all down the toilet.”

    Flushing down the toilet our unparalleled civilization is exactly what you and other commenters here seem to be suggesting we should do in the face of our current travails. We’re currently in a cultural and demographic down spiral, yes. Despairing and deciding to start shilling for an alien people with hardly any civilizacional accomplishments of their own is definitely not the answer.

    “So it’s obvious that a lot of white people are only able to feel good about themselves by clinging to the notion of white superiority. We might be a decadent declining civilisation but muh creativity!”

    Are you Jewish? Or just a self-hating White who internalised their propaganda and decided to redirect it into brown-nosing the chinks?

    “ All decadent declining civilisations do this. When the Greeks discovered that the Romans were now their masters they consoled themselves with muh creativity as well.”

    To use your less than sophisticated language and reasoning: MUH DECADENCE. We’ve been through that before: Greece, Rome, Middle Ages, etc. We bounced back, we can do it again. But if you despise the west so much I suggest you should leave. Let’s see if the chinks will want you there. Spoiler: they won’t.
    , @Astuteobservor II
    I must defend the white men here. They didn't want this, it was shelve down their throat.

    This is actually just one of the ways white men is being put down in the West to make way.

    Racists are racists, no need to rationalize them. Nationalism, exceptionism can also blind one's eyes and retard a mind.
  52. clinging to the notion of white superiority

    You must have come from a parallel universe, because in this reality the only talk allowed is about racial equality, white privilege and general demonization of white people.

  53. @Attila
    Chinese assholes know it alls - know nothing with their civilisational state oldest civilisation etc. LEARN BASIC EATING habits and HYGIENE. Hell even Africans are clean compared to these ****’*. Quit trying to be the new hegemon-it’s BORING. Invent something REALLY.

    Chinese civilisation is about seventy years old.

    • Replies: @L.D.
    More like 40 years and it’s not even theirs, it’s a parody of ours.

    From the clothes they wear to the junk food they eat to the toilet papers they wipe their bums with to the toilets where they crap, it’s all ours, those morons created NOTHING. The idiots couldn’t even run a damn lab without starting a world pandemic.

    To see people in the West crowing and braying about “muh glorious Chinese civilization” is hilarious and just shows how culturally shallow most supposedly educated people really are.
  54. @Daemon
    I love this argument, it completely exposes the absolute head-up-their-ass mentality that white supremacists have at their core. Did you try to look for these people or did you just flat out write them off as something that doesnt exist before you decided to mouth off?

    The Chinese are a very inward looking people, and self-promotion is NOT their racial forte.
    Coupled with a cultural barrier that is relentlessly occident-centric, where works only exist if they have enough of an english language presence, means the VAST majority of chinese literary and scientific literature are functionally inaccessible. If something is not translated, it does not exist within the western psyche. It does not mean they and their authors do not exist. Since there is an extreme dearth of individuals who are capable of translating chinese to english while retaining the essence of these works, there is no one to judge the merit of these works and so the chinese cultural footprint in the west is effectively zero. That translates to the illusion that an entire country of 1.3b people are completely incapable of literary or artistic output and can at best only work in a factory making doodads.

    Does this feel right to you?

    Do you know a single Chinese author/philosopher/artist/scientist? Let me guess, Sun Tzu. What other work was he responsible for apart from The Art of War? You can't name one without googling. Just like how you cannot name a single chinese individual except maybe a coworker or neighbor.
    Even your poodle of an ally Japan has at most only half a dozen well-known and respected individuals and they've been at your beck and call for over half a century.

    When you dont make an effort to look, how can you make an accurate comparison?
    Because you don't want to find them. That would destroy your worldview that only whites are capable of 'innovation' and 'progress' and that your future on the top of the totem pole is assured.

    It isnt.

    Your argument takes no account of the fact that Japanese culture is extremely popular in the rest of the world. Even Korean culture (although in more demotic forms like K-pop/TV serials) is popular in the rest of the world.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Most Westerners could only name the most demotic of Japanese culture, though. Even something as silly as light novels doesn't make much penetration.

    In that sense, China has managed to penetrate the Western market with some mobile games too.
    , @songbird
    As Europeans, we should be more embarrassed than the Chinese.

    They do not allow anti-Chinese propaganda to be produced within their political dominion. Neither do they allow anti-Chinese films to be produced in the West.

    Compared to us, that is quite impressive.
  55. @Hapalong Cassidy
    I doubt China has more nukes than they let on. As Dr. Strangelove said, the entire point of a Doomsday Device is lost if you keep it a secret.

    First, just because we do not know the exact number of Chinese nukes does not mean that Pentagon does not know. And there can be many reasons why they do not make it public. Intelligence world has its own rules.
    Second, nuclear war does not start out of the blue. As mad as the US foreign policy sometimes seems to be, attacking china with decapitating strike just does not seem very probable at moment. There will be long step-by-step escalation before ICBM-s start to fly and Chinese may prefer to reveal their trump cards at the suitable time.
    Maybe the recent public discussion in China is meant to slowly prepare the world for their big announcement (that they have 1500+ warheads)? Seems logical to me – they may have estimated that the probability of nuclear strike has increased recently and thus they have to cool some heads across Pacific. But they prefer to make it slowly and in small steps..

  56. @L.D.
    “ First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization.”

    Who exactly is the Chinese Isaac Newton? The Chinese Darwin? The Chinese Copernicus? The Chinese Shakespeare? The Chinese Michelangelo? The Chinese Aristotle? The Chinese Beethoven? The Chinese Cervantes?

    As far as I can’t tell they’re nowhere to be seen. And yet the pro-China enthusiasts, who incessantly crow about it supposedly having “5 000 years of uninterrupted history” would have us believe that such a nation has indeed a glorious civilisation. Give me a break.

    What strikes me about China is how utterly unimpressive its accomplishments are for a people who has been around for so long.

    But now that Russia is well on the way to becoming a vassal state to the Chinese (providing it with cheap raw materials, as the Third World country it is) Anatoly has taken it upon himself to sing the praises of the future slanted-eyed masters of his defeated nation. What a joke! Not having a country to be proud of, he seems to have decided to outsource his patriotism to his neighbours. Sad.

    Who exactly is

    The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been. – Canute

    A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. – Clausewitz

    I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly dreaming I am a man. – Samuel Clemens

    For their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles. – Siegfried & Roy

    In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion. – Stepan Bandera

    [MORE]
    Hello smith.

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
    Lee Kuan Yew:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/Lee_Kuan_Yew.jpg/440px-Lee_Kuan_Yew.jpg

    Stepan Bandera:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/SBandera-colour.jpg


    Learn the difference, it could save your life!
  57. All those Asians were not looking so grand after those mushroom clouds over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the fire storm over Tokyo.

  58. L.D. says: • Website
    @yakushimaru

    Let me correct this sentence for you: The Chinese Communist Party (Did the chinks invent Communism by the way?) needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect ITSELF against the Chinese people and KEEP ITSELF in power.
     
    It is people not living here exhibiting most intense hate out of ideology and whatnot.

    I suggest you pay more attention to your own country. Of course you won't. People like you, being a nationalist, is just having an excuse so they can blame the foreigners.

    We have neolibs who is war plus whatever. Then neocons who is war plus whatever. Now we are seeing neo version of nationalists. They are war with different excuses. You are being played by your own master and you are so free. You think.

    “ It is people not living here exhibiting most intense hate out of ideology and whatnot.”

    For the record, I’m European. And I don’t need any ideology to dislike, despise and distrust these creatures, I just need some common sense. It’s not us who’s pouring into their shitty country and trying to subvert it from within, it’s the other way round. These people don’t have plans to be a benign power and if you think otherwise the joke is on you.

    “ I suggest you pay more attention to your own country. Of course you won’t. People like you, being a nationalist, is just having an excuse so they can blame the foreigners.”

    I suggest you do the same. Pace Ron Unz’s crazy conspiracy theory, the flu devastating the world’s economy did come from a lab in f*cking Wuhan, in chinkland. (Look for a YouTube video called I Found The Source of Coronavirus, by youtuber laowhy86). Do we even have a parallel in world history for what’s happening now? We should never have allowed any transfer of OUR technology to those morons. And it’s comical to see you defending the chinks and in the same breath talking about “blaming foreigners” in negative terms. The Chinese are known to be anything but xenophobic uh? 😂

    “ You are being played by your own master and you are so free. You think.”

    You’re right to suggest that we’re not free: we haven’t been for a long time now, as we live under ZOG, but you’re a fool if you want to get rid of it just to to live under the boot of the CCP. Would you like to replace your current Semite masters with chink ones? Really?

    • Troll: d dan
  59. @Blinky Bill

    Who exactly is
     
    The empire, long divided, must unite; long united, must divide. Thus it has ever been. – Canute

    A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. – Clausewitz

    I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly dreaming I am a man. – Samuel Clemens

    For their penetrating investigation of the so-called parity laws which has led to important discoveries regarding the elementary particles. – Siegfried & Roy

    In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion. – Stepan Bandera


    https://i.redd.it/rmt33yfl19241.jpg
    Hello smith.

    Lee Kuan Yew:

    Stepan Bandera:

    Learn the difference, it could save your life!

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    I think you've missed the point. But that's OK, because I think you're a cool dude. Check the other quotes.
  60. @Tusk
    China could feasibly go nuclear as long term prospects for the country. Not just in the senes of warheads but nuclear physics and energy industry as well, which would be beneficial for them since it would shore up their energy security risks by transferring to an industry they can have control of. Simultaneously this brings forward a threefold strategy for the future based on high-IQ science industry, domestic energy, national security.

    That being said, if China goes hard on nuclear across the board it might encourage other states to stop being losers and develop their own nuclear industries instead of being afraid of something that can't see.

    Alexey Bannik, vice president of China projects at Russia’s AtomStroyExport (ASE), has given the schedule for new VVER-1200 units at Tianwan and Xudabao. Construction of Tianwan unit 7 will start in May 2021, and that of Xudabao unit 3 and of Tianwan unit 8 will start five and 10 months later, respectively. The launch of the Tianwan units is scheduled for 2026 and 2027 while the third and fourth units at the Xudabao plant will both be launched in 2028.

    [MORE]

    ASE and China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) signed the general contract for the construction of Tianwan 7 and 8 and a technical contract for two new units at Xudabao on 7 March. These contracts were prepared in accordance with the strategic package of agreements signed during a visit by Russian President Vladimir Putin to China last June. This package defines cooperation between Russia and China in the nuclear industry in the coming decades. Contracts for Tianwan 7 and 8 were signed between CNNC and Rosatom in early November marking the implementation of the framework contracts.

    ASE is the engineering division of Rosatom and Bannik’s comments appeared in an interview with the state nuclear corporation’s newspaper, Strana Rosatom, yesterday.

    “According to the contract, first concrete will be poured at Tianwan-7 in May 2021; five months later at Xudabao-3; another five months later at Tianwan-8; and another five months after that Xudabao-4,” Bannik said. “That is, there will be a 10-month gap between units 7 and 8 at Tianwan, and a five-month gap between the seventh unit at Tianwan and the third unit at Xudabao, which is a new site for us. The target dates are very ambitious and meeting them will require clear and coordinated work by all the project participants.”

    The construction site of Tianwan 7 and 8 is “essentially ready”, Bannik said. “Now we are working on levelling it out, but we already know this area because we’ve built four units there and so we don’t need to conduct any additional surveys,” he added. The Chinese side has fully prepared the Xudabao site for the construction of six blocks, two of which ASE will build, he said.

    Bannik said: “We are planning the nuclear island, issuing the technical requirements and monitoring the plant as a whole, as well as the safety concept and preparing documents for licensing. The Chinese side is responsible for designing the non-nuclear island part and supplying all the equipment for it. We will supply the main equipment of the nuclear island and some security systems. The Russians will participate in all stages of construction.”

    He added: “There are many specialists in the company – they are our old friends who worked on the construction of the Tianwan units, which we are very pleased with. The division of labour at the new units is no different to that at Tianwan-3 and -4, for which the Chinese side has fully taken over the construction work. Therefore, we don’t plan to bring our own resources to the extent that we need to at sites in other countries. But, perhaps, we will need specialists to work in the representative offices and on-site to oversee the construction and installation work by the Chinese side.”

    ASE plans to boost the number of personnel working on its China projects, he said, “but not by much”.

    “In the management company, we want to keep the number of the Chinese directorate at an optimal level. The projects for the units are similar and it is necessary to take advantage of this, and not to over-inflate it. As for representation in China, the sites are located too far from each other, in different provinces. For Xudabao, we’ll have to create a structure, almost repeating the representation in Lianyungang, at the construction site of the Tianwan NPP. That is a requirement of the contract,” Bannik said.

    The VVER-1200 projects in China will differ slightly to units of the same design built in Russia, he said, owing to different soil, climate and water supply features. In addition, the Chinese customer has a number of specific requirements related to nuclear, radiation and fire safety, and environmental impact, he added without elaborating.

    Novovoronezh II-2 will be the third VVER-1200 to be commissioned, following Novovoronezh II-1 and Leningrad II-1, which were launched in 2016 and 2017, respectively.

    Rosatom describes the VVER-1200 as a Generation III+ power unit, which has a number of economic and safety advantages when compared to the previous generation (VVER-1000). It is 20% more powerful; requires 30-40% fewer operator personnel; and its operating period is twice as long, at 60 years, with the possibility of extension by an additional 20 years.

    Rosatom also has VVER-1200 construction projects in Bangladesh, Belarus, Finland and Hungary.

  61. @Kent Nationalist
    Lee Kuan Yew:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/Lee_Kuan_Yew.jpg/440px-Lee_Kuan_Yew.jpg

    Stepan Bandera:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/SBandera-colour.jpg


    Learn the difference, it could save your life!

    I think you’ve missed the point. But that’s OK, because I think you’re a cool dude. Check the other quotes.

  62. @dfordoom

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives.
     
    If you look at the current state of the West it's pretty obvious that there's not much to be proud of. We achieved a lot in civilisational terms but we seem to be intent on flushing it all down the toilet. In recent times the West's greatest achievement has been to recognise the right of men in dresses to use the ladies' room.

    So it's obvious that a lot of white people are only able to feel good about themselves by clinging to the notion of white superiority. We might be a decadent declining civilisation but muh creativity!

    All decadent declining civilisations do this. When the Greeks discovered that the Romans were now their masters they consoled themselves with muh creativity as well.

    ” We achieved a lot in civilisational terms but we seem to be intent on flushing it all down the toilet.”

    Flushing down the toilet our unparalleled civilization is exactly what you and other commenters here seem to be suggesting we should do in the face of our current travails. We’re currently in a cultural and demographic down spiral, yes. Despairing and deciding to start shilling for an alien people with hardly any civilizacional accomplishments of their own is definitely not the answer.

    “So it’s obvious that a lot of white people are only able to feel good about themselves by clinging to the notion of white superiority. We might be a decadent declining civilisation but muh creativity!”

    Are you Jewish? Or just a self-hating White who internalised their propaganda and decided to redirect it into brown-nosing the chinks?

    “ All decadent declining civilisations do this. When the Greeks discovered that the Romans were now their masters they consoled themselves with muh creativity as well.”

    To use your less than sophisticated language and reasoning: MUH DECADENCE. We’ve been through that before: Greece, Rome, Middle Ages, etc. We bounced back, we can do it again. But if you despise the west so much I suggest you should leave. Let’s see if the chinks will want you there. Spoiler: they won’t.

    • Troll: d dan
    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Are you Jewish? Or just a self-hating White who internalised their propaganda and decided to redirect it into brown-nosing the chinks?
     
    Remarkably enough I'm neither Jewish nor the slightest bit self-hating. I am however saddened by the plight of our civilisation. I just don't think that blaming others for own own mistakes will help. And I don't need to hate other civilisations to feel good about myself.

    We broke our civilisation. We need to fix it. We can't do that until we take a good long hard look at the mistakes we've made. That's what grownups do. Little kids blame others.
    , @Platz
    Aren't you a Portuguese nigger? The main accomplishment of Portuguese niggers is creating the largest nigger colony in the New World.
  63. L.D. says: • Website
    @Kent Nationalist
    Chinese civilisation is about seventy years old.

    More like 40 years and it’s not even theirs, it’s a parody of ours.

    From the clothes they wear to the junk food they eat to the toilet papers they wipe their bums with to the toilets where they crap, it’s all ours, those morons created NOTHING. The idiots couldn’t even run a damn lab without starting a world pandemic.

    To see people in the West crowing and braying about “muh glorious Chinese civilization” is hilarious and just shows how culturally shallow most supposedly educated people really are.

    • Troll: d dan
  64. @yakushimaru

    Let me correct this sentence for you: The Chinese Communist Party (Did the chinks invent Communism by the way?) needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect ITSELF against the Chinese people and KEEP ITSELF in power.
     
    It is people not living here exhibiting most intense hate out of ideology and whatnot.

    I suggest you pay more attention to your own country. Of course you won't. People like you, being a nationalist, is just having an excuse so they can blame the foreigners.

    We have neolibs who is war plus whatever. Then neocons who is war plus whatever. Now we are seeing neo version of nationalists. They are war with different excuses. You are being played by your own master and you are so free. You think.

    You are replying to this guy : https://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=Smith. He comments under several different handles, the most common one been smith also HongkongHibernian and Sol. But he always maintains the same distinctive style. His primary purpose is to derail the thread through trolling. Don’t take the bait please. Several of us have had issues with him in the past.

  65. @Raphael
    This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality that his pwecious GloboHomo ZOGocracy (which he conflates with the civilization of Periclean Athens, lel) is collapsing spectacularly before everyone's eyes.

    I'd like to move things back on track by declaring my appreciation for all the thoughtful comments and commentators here, especially on a topic as momentous as the global balance of power in strategic nuclear forces. I find the theory that the Chinese nuclear arsenal could actually be in the low four figures to be quite compelling, based on the bravado its shown over the past two decades, starting roughly in 2005 with the "Anti-Secession Law" that committed itself to military intervention in Taiwan, to its seizure of Scarborough Shoal against US treaty ally the Philippines, to its defiant construction of artificial islands that could be easily decimated by the USN. These are not the sort of actions undertaken by a country that can be shut down with a decapitation strike.

    This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality that his pwecious GloboHomo ZOGocracy (which he conflates with the civilization of Periclean Athens, lel) is collapsing spectacularly before everyone’s eyes.

    Pretenders are not uncommon. The Internet isn’t for the undiscerning.

    BTW white supremacist is a slur and a tool of censorship.

  66. @dfordoom

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives.
     
    If you look at the current state of the West it's pretty obvious that there's not much to be proud of. We achieved a lot in civilisational terms but we seem to be intent on flushing it all down the toilet. In recent times the West's greatest achievement has been to recognise the right of men in dresses to use the ladies' room.

    So it's obvious that a lot of white people are only able to feel good about themselves by clinging to the notion of white superiority. We might be a decadent declining civilisation but muh creativity!

    All decadent declining civilisations do this. When the Greeks discovered that the Romans were now their masters they consoled themselves with muh creativity as well.

    I must defend the white men here. They didn’t want this, it was shelve down their throat.

    This is actually just one of the ways white men is being put down in the West to make way.

    Racists are racists, no need to rationalize them. Nationalism, exceptionism can also blind one’s eyes and retard a mind.

  67. @yakushimaru
    Let us do a little bit of sci-fi.

    Suppose Taiwan goes full steam ahead THIS year in seeking independence. Suppose some small but significant countries officially recognize them, say Denmark. Part of their rationale might be that the global economy not being able to come back, there ain't much money to be earned from Chinese market, and Bannon. And the moral angle, from their point of view.

    Chinese actively prepares for invasion.

    US drops a small nuke in the strait.

    What next? The MAD is probably going to be exposed as just a pretension.

    In the THREE BODIES series, Liu Cixing talked about this. It can be extremely impossible for you to go all out when it simply means suicide to yourself and severe damage to the other guy, given that the alternative is likely that you can still live as a loser.

    For the weaker party to escape this dire situation, he must make his willingness to die loud and clear.

    Or build 1000 nukes with the ICBMs to carry them.

    And who told you that China has to retaliate immediately? Why couldn’t China build enough nukes first?

    Wishful thinking when it comes to nukes is fucking planet ending serious.

    And shit, what kinda moron would one need to be to think USA is willing to go back to the stone age for Taiwan? American elites willing to live like Neanderthals in the future for Taiwan? Piss off.

  68. @L.D.
    ” We achieved a lot in civilisational terms but we seem to be intent on flushing it all down the toilet.”

    Flushing down the toilet our unparalleled civilization is exactly what you and other commenters here seem to be suggesting we should do in the face of our current travails. We’re currently in a cultural and demographic down spiral, yes. Despairing and deciding to start shilling for an alien people with hardly any civilizacional accomplishments of their own is definitely not the answer.

    “So it’s obvious that a lot of white people are only able to feel good about themselves by clinging to the notion of white superiority. We might be a decadent declining civilisation but muh creativity!”

    Are you Jewish? Or just a self-hating White who internalised their propaganda and decided to redirect it into brown-nosing the chinks?

    “ All decadent declining civilisations do this. When the Greeks discovered that the Romans were now their masters they consoled themselves with muh creativity as well.”

    To use your less than sophisticated language and reasoning: MUH DECADENCE. We’ve been through that before: Greece, Rome, Middle Ages, etc. We bounced back, we can do it again. But if you despise the west so much I suggest you should leave. Let’s see if the chinks will want you there. Spoiler: they won’t.

    Are you Jewish? Or just a self-hating White who internalised their propaganda and decided to redirect it into brown-nosing the chinks?

    Remarkably enough I’m neither Jewish nor the slightest bit self-hating. I am however saddened by the plight of our civilisation. I just don’t think that blaming others for own own mistakes will help. And I don’t need to hate other civilisations to feel good about myself.

    We broke our civilisation. We need to fix it. We can’t do that until we take a good long hard look at the mistakes we’ve made. That’s what grownups do. Little kids blame others.

  69. @Attila
    Chinese assholes know it alls - know nothing with their civilisational state oldest civilisation etc. LEARN BASIC EATING habits and HYGIENE. Hell even Africans are clean compared to these ****’*. Quit trying to be the new hegemon-it’s BORING. Invent something REALLY.

    • Replies: @songbird
    I should very much like to see the CCP institute an anti-smoking campaign constructed around Mugabe. "Mugabe lived to age 95 by selling the Chinese tobacco - he didn't smoke, but he wanted you to." (Picture of Mugabe smiling broadly in one of his colorful suits, with pictures of him on it)
  70. Love all the anti-Chinese comments, Hallelujah! All countries on this planet must get nukes to protect themselves against the dastardly Chinese.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Stupid comment. China would be better off with every country getting nukes than USA.

    Think about why, you can do it.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    Deprived of all actual power, the Homo Interneticus retreats to their final resort: whining online.
  71. @Blinky Bill
    https://youtu.be/_KuD4sI5Efs

    I should very much like to see the CCP institute an anti-smoking campaign constructed around Mugabe. “Mugabe lived to age 95 by selling the Chinese tobacco – he didn’t smoke, but he wanted you to.” (Picture of Mugabe smiling broadly in one of his colorful suits, with pictures of him on it)

    • Agree: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    Chinese Tobacco production is nearly all consumed domestically.

    Country. Production (tonnes)
    China 2,391,000
    Brazil 880,881
    India 799,960
    United States 322,120
    Zimbabwe 181,643
    Indonesia 152,319
    Zambia 131,509

    Chinese smoke too much. 🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬

  72. @gT
    Love all the anti-Chinese comments, Hallelujah! All countries on this planet must get nukes to protect themselves against the dastardly Chinese.

    Stupid comment. China would be better off with every country getting nukes than USA.

    Think about why, you can do it.

  73. @songbird
    I should very much like to see the CCP institute an anti-smoking campaign constructed around Mugabe. "Mugabe lived to age 95 by selling the Chinese tobacco - he didn't smoke, but he wanted you to." (Picture of Mugabe smiling broadly in one of his colorful suits, with pictures of him on it)

    Chinese Tobacco production is nearly all consumed domestically.

    Country. Production (tonnes)
    China 2,391,000
    Brazil 880,881
    India 799,960
    United States 322,120
    Zimbabwe 181,643
    Indonesia 152,319
    Zambia 131,509

    Chinese smoke too much. 🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬🚬

    • Thanks: songbird
  74. @Tusk
    China could feasibly go nuclear as long term prospects for the country. Not just in the senes of warheads but nuclear physics and energy industry as well, which would be beneficial for them since it would shore up their energy security risks by transferring to an industry they can have control of. Simultaneously this brings forward a threefold strategy for the future based on high-IQ science industry, domestic energy, national security.

    That being said, if China goes hard on nuclear across the board it might encourage other states to stop being losers and develop their own nuclear industries instead of being afraid of something that can't see.

    China has been working on that, including thorium nuclear reactors which can’t be weaponized.

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    How China hopes to play a leading role in developing next-generation nuclear reactors.

    Chinese researchers have ambitious plans that could pave the way for cleaner, safer and more efficient reactors that could cut reliance on fossil fuels
    China is pushing ahead with ambitious plans for its nuclear industry, including developing cleaner and safer next-generation technology.
    A particular focus is a plan to develop the world’s first large-scale thorium-powered, molten-salt reactors – which could generate less radioactive waste and help reduce the reliance on fossil fuels to reduce the world’s energy needs – by 2020.
    The head of one of the country’s research programmes said Chinese researchers had mastered the technology in laboratories and now aimed to be the first in the world to make it commercially viable.
    Laurence Leung, a scientist with the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, said China “is also leading the development of a few other models” and “is putting a lot of resources” into developing fourth-generation nuclear power.

    At present the country relies on nuclear technology from the United States and France, but hopes the heavy investment will allow it to play a leading role in the multinational Generation-IV International Forum.

    The forum, a 14-member intergovernmental R&D collaboration, aims to pool resources, allowing scientists to develop safer and cheaper next-generation systems.
    Other members include the US, France, Russia and Canada, while Britain, Brazil and Argentina hope to play a more active role in future.

    After whittling down nearly 100 proffered concepts, the forum is now focusing on developing six reactor models.
    “China wants to test all the fourth-generation concepts before moving forward,” said Leung, who is also an adjunct professor at the McMaster University in Canada and Xian Jiaotong University in China.

    “It’s still very cost-effective at the developing phase. Once you move to the commercial use, there is no turning back.”
    A major focus is developing thorium-based, molten-salt reactors – which scientists hope can be developed to help meet the world’s growing need for energy without contributing to global warming.

    These reactors are powered by controlled fission reactions in the same way as conventional uranium reactors.
    However, the technology could prove to be cheaper and cleaner, while the use of thorium – which is less radioactive than uranium – should generate less waste.
    Replacing water as a coolant with liquid molten salt could tap more of the energy available in radioactive materials and reduce the risk of a meltdown by slowing the nuclear reactions automatically if they get too hot.

    Xu Hongjie, director of China’s molten-salt programme, told an academic conference in Shanghai last month that China had mastered the technology in laboratories and planned to put it into commercial use by 2030 – before anyone else did so.
    The programme is led by the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, part of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
    China, the world’s largest electricity consumer, has already built 45 uranium-powered reactors, but these only generate 3.6 per cent of the country’s total output.
    The figure is about 10 per cent for Canada, the US and France.
    One advantage of developing molten-salt reactors is that because they do not need so much water, China can build them in remote desert regions, away from its densely populated east coast.

    Work on two molten-salt reactors located in the Gobi Desert in Gansu province began in 2011. The 12-megawatt reactors were designed to show the viability of the technology and it is hoped they will be up and running by next year.
    “We have been conducting research in Shanghai, starting from nearly nothing,” Xu said. “And we now mastered the technology to produce key devices for such reactors, owning 202 patents.”
    China has invested about 2 billion yuan (US$300 million) over the past few years in molten-salt research and development, but building the plants will require tens of billions more.

    The basic technology was developed in America’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which invented the reactors in the 1970s but the US stopped developing them as it decided to concentrate on uranium-based reactors because of their military applications.
    “The US chose to focus on the uranium-based reactors,” said Luk Binglam, a nuclear engineering professor with City University of Hong Kong.
    “The reasons are not all technical. You need to consider the political climate at that time.”
    Xu told the MIT Technology Review in 2016 that Oak Ridge had posted most of the technical documents the Chinese team needed to develop the technology online for free.
    There are a number of practical hurdles to overcome if the researchers are to develop a commercially viable model, but if they succeed it could make China a leader in the industry.
    The development of cleaner and safer models could increase global demand for nuclear power, which has prompted widespread public concern in the wake of disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima.
    Some countries have banned its use and other places, including Germany and Taiwan, have moved to phase out their existing reactors.
    Leung said that another advantage of China developing the technology was that while it had to import uranium to power its current reactors, it had large reserves of thorium and would not need to rely on others for such crucial raw materials.

    , @Anonymous (n)
    I never saw that as an actual advantage of a design for domestic use by a nuclear power. Weapons grade fissile material is valuable, the fact a reactor can produce it as a byproduct of power generation is icing on the cake. Now if you told me thorium reactors produce less radioactive waste then I might take that as a benefit, but they do not. In fact, the waste they generate is more hazardous in the "short" run than that made by traditional reactor designs. So not only are you deprived of valuable weapons grade plutonium, but you're now stuck with a crapload of useless but extremely difficult to contain gamma emitting sludge.

    The optimal way forward for fission should be closed cycle fast breeder reactors burning uranium and plutonium. This has the advantage of having the highest fuel efficiency out of all possible designs, as well as reprocessing the vast majority of the waste fuel back into fissile material that can be fed back to the reactor or used in warheads. The only "downside" to this route is faggy bleating about "proliferation concerns" but in the case of existing nuclear powers the production of weapons grade material is a feature, not a bug. If you want to make more warheads with it you do it, otherwise just burn it again and make more electricity.

  75. @L.D.
    ”The Chinese just needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect it. They are good to go.”

    Let me correct this sentence for you: The Chinese Communist Party (Did the chinks invent Communism by the way?) needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect ITSELF against the Chinese people and KEEP ITSELF in power. Good luck with that in the long run.

    “And I would consider paper, gunpowder and compass to be monumental inventions of human development and history.”

    You’re absolutely right. Problem is, 3 inventions in 5 thousand years of history is not exactly a spectacular track record, right? And what’s more important, you fail to grasp the essential, epistemological difference between technology and SCIENCE. Several civilisations have reached relatively sophisticated levels of technology but only the West came up with what what we define as science. The chinks didn’t invent calculus, chemistry, physics nor the modern medicine. We did.

    “China missed out on the first two industrial revolutions. Catching up during this 3rd one. Soon the 4th, AI/automation will have a head start with 5g.”

    As Shakespeare put it, PAST IS PROLOGUE. If the chinks were capable of a scientific revolution of their own they would have done it by now. And yet till 1978, when Deng started modernising the country (that is to say when they started adopting everything WE invented and opened themselves to OUR capital, after the disaster of Maoism), China was as backward as Africa. As to the notion that China will soon be a civilizacional beacon and will conquer the world... where have we heard that before? Wasn’t the Soviet Union going to be exactly that according to the talking heads in the 60s? And then didn’t they say the same about Japan in the 80s? Now the eggheads have a new shiny object to toy with: China. Well, China is a confederation of peoples speaking a multitude of different languages, being kept together by a totalitarian state. Like I said before, good luck to CCP in staying in power and keeping the country from breaking apart into several nations in the long run.

    “Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?”

    The adjective “retarded” would seem more aptly used to describe a civilisation that invented 3 thing in 5 thousand years and which until 1978 had a per capita income lower than Somalia, don’t you think? And as to the US supposedly being in the course of “waging full spectrum war” on the chinks: WE CAN ONLY WISH. I couldn’t care less about any kind of anti-Chinese propaganda from the American government, I speak for myself: I don’t want to live in a world remotely influenced by the Chinese in general nor by the CCP in particular. The chinks are VILE people: corrupt, authoritarian and vulgarly materialistic. It’s understandable that a guy like Anatoly, being Russian, fantasises about living in a global Chinkocracy, as his people have been slaves since forever and they can’t conceive life not being under someone’s boot. But why free white men would be waxing lyrical and having widely unrealistic wet-dreams about being ruled by a race of extremely physically unattractive yellow little thieves is utterly beyond me.

    It is a pain in the ass to reply to long ass comments on my phone.

    Anyone who tries to separate the govt and it’s governed people are bitch asses who can’t handle responsibility. Kindly fuck off with the bullshit that you hate the Chinese govt but not the Chinese. So what if you are a racist? Owned it bitch.

    Those 3 you dismissed so easily essentially built the human civilization. Without paper think humans could retain and use knowledge so easily? Gunpowder took war to a whole new level. Compass allowed the Europeans to colonize almost the entire earth with a few hold outs like China.

    I have no idea who came up with the scientific method. No arguments from me here. I am sure Arab historians would like a chat. Not gonna Google just for this comment. But to dismissed those 3 Chinese inventions so off handily, wtf were you smoking?

    I fully agree no country is a civilizational beacon or able to conquer the world. Whomever espouses that idea of the Chinese is as stupid as the Americans who thinks they are exceptional. But first mover advantages of the coming AI and automation will give huge advantages to China.

    I doubt anyone dreams of being ruled by the Chinese or white men or any other. Why do you project everything bad that you can think of onto the Chinese without them doing anything? Define your world? USA or the entire world? If former, sure. If latter, bitch, you are shit out of luck, as that is not in your control. The Chinese are vile? Retard, as an American, you are trying to point fingers? We have been invading n killing other people non fucking stop for the last few decades. Have some self awareness. If truly curious, Google how many countries we have invaded since 1945 and how many people have died as the result.

    Retarded put downs are retarded put downs. It means stupid. Racism is 100% OK, just don’t try to put it on a pedestal.

    Why are you so scare that China would have nuclear parity? You want to nuke China?

  76. @Kent Nationalist
    Your argument takes no account of the fact that Japanese culture is extremely popular in the rest of the world. Even Korean culture (although in more demotic forms like K-pop/TV serials) is popular in the rest of the world.

    Most Westerners could only name the most demotic of Japanese culture, though. Even something as silly as light novels doesn’t make much penetration.

    In that sense, China has managed to penetrate the Western market with some mobile games too.

  77. @gT
    Love all the anti-Chinese comments, Hallelujah! All countries on this planet must get nukes to protect themselves against the dastardly Chinese.

    Deprived of all actual power, the Homo Interneticus retreats to their final resort: whining online.

    • LOL: Korenchkin
    • Replies: @gT
    Yada, yada, yada. Short something or others can never rule this planet, didn't you guys learn anything from the Japs?
  78. @Raphael
    This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality that his pwecious GloboHomo ZOGocracy (which he conflates with the civilization of Periclean Athens, lel) is collapsing spectacularly before everyone's eyes.

    I'd like to move things back on track by declaring my appreciation for all the thoughtful comments and commentators here, especially on a topic as momentous as the global balance of power in strategic nuclear forces. I find the theory that the Chinese nuclear arsenal could actually be in the low four figures to be quite compelling, based on the bravado its shown over the past two decades, starting roughly in 2005 with the "Anti-Secession Law" that committed itself to military intervention in Taiwan, to its seizure of Scarborough Shoal against US treaty ally the Philippines, to its defiant construction of artificial islands that could be easily decimated by the USN. These are not the sort of actions undertaken by a country that can be shut down with a decapitation strike.

    “This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality…”

    Agree. Maybe the author’s use of “nuclear parity” triggers those dumb ass to swarm here, contributing nothing to the discussion. Look: how can China achieve “parity” in anything to any white country. That’s simply unacceptable.

    “I find the theory that the Chinese nuclear arsenal could actually be in the low four figures to be quite compelling…”

    From China’s point of view, it is important to find out what foreigners think about 1000-nuke China. Like playing chess, you don’t make a move unless you consider what others will do. The main countries to look out are the reactions of Russia, US, Japan and India.

    Also, a smaller stockpile makes it easier to maintain technological edge and upgrading. China and Russia currently have better missile technologies than US, so part of US quantitative advantage can be mitigated through better accuracy and multi-entry vehicle.

    It was also reported somewhere that China is the ONLY country that still deploy hydrogen bombs among the five “hydrogen bomb capable” countries. I don’t know how accurate is this, but it fits well with China “diversity” strategy.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    IMO, China should not worry about the reactions from other countries.

    Does China want to be nuked and without a retaliatory strike?

    The answer should be obvious.

    Also, do it for all of us, not just the Chinese.
    , @Anonymous (n)
    "It was also reported somewhere that China is the ONLY country that still deploy hydrogen bombs among the five “hydrogen bomb capable” countries. I don’t know how accurate is this, but it fits well with China “diversity” strategy."

    This is incorrect. All the major nuclear powers deploy thermonuclear warheads (almost?) exclusively. When nukes are discussed in the present context they are invariably thermonuclear ie fusion ie "h-bombs." The last time a true fission device was in active deployment by one of the big 5 must have been several decades ago. I suppose it's possible the very new "low yield" Trident warhead the US began introducing into service last year is a pure fission device, but even that is just a throttled down version of the thermonuclear W-76 warhead from the 70's where they just probably removed the secondary stage and left the primary stage.
  79. @Daniel Chieh
    Deprived of all actual power, the Homo Interneticus retreats to their final resort: whining online.

    Yada, yada, yada. Short something or others can never rule this planet, didn’t you guys learn anything from the Japs?

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
    Stage 1: Denial
  80. @Daniel Chieh
    China has been working on that, including thorium nuclear reactors which can't be weaponized.

    How China hopes to play a leading role in developing next-generation nuclear reactors.

    [MORE]

    Chinese researchers have ambitious plans that could pave the way for cleaner, safer and more efficient reactors that could cut reliance on fossil fuels
    China is pushing ahead with ambitious plans for its nuclear industry, including developing cleaner and safer next-generation technology.
    A particular focus is a plan to develop the world’s first large-scale thorium-powered, molten-salt reactors – which could generate less radioactive waste and help reduce the reliance on fossil fuels to reduce the world’s energy needs – by 2020.
    The head of one of the country’s research programmes said Chinese researchers had mastered the technology in laboratories and now aimed to be the first in the world to make it commercially viable.
    Laurence Leung, a scientist with the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, said China “is also leading the development of a few other models” and “is putting a lot of resources” into developing fourth-generation nuclear power.

    At present the country relies on nuclear technology from the United States and France, but hopes the heavy investment will allow it to play a leading role in the multinational Generation-IV International Forum.

    The forum, a 14-member intergovernmental R&D collaboration, aims to pool resources, allowing scientists to develop safer and cheaper next-generation systems.
    Other members include the US, France, Russia and Canada, while Britain, Brazil and Argentina hope to play a more active role in future.

    After whittling down nearly 100 proffered concepts, the forum is now focusing on developing six reactor models.
    “China wants to test all the fourth-generation concepts before moving forward,” said Leung, who is also an adjunct professor at the McMaster University in Canada and Xian Jiaotong University in China.

    “It’s still very cost-effective at the developing phase. Once you move to the commercial use, there is no turning back.”
    A major focus is developing thorium-based, molten-salt reactors – which scientists hope can be developed to help meet the world’s growing need for energy without contributing to global warming.

    These reactors are powered by controlled fission reactions in the same way as conventional uranium reactors.
    However, the technology could prove to be cheaper and cleaner, while the use of thorium – which is less radioactive than uranium – should generate less waste.
    Replacing water as a coolant with liquid molten salt could tap more of the energy available in radioactive materials and reduce the risk of a meltdown by slowing the nuclear reactions automatically if they get too hot.

    Xu Hongjie, director of China’s molten-salt programme, told an academic conference in Shanghai last month that China had mastered the technology in laboratories and planned to put it into commercial use by 2030 – before anyone else did so.
    The programme is led by the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, part of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
    China, the world’s largest electricity consumer, has already built 45 uranium-powered reactors, but these only generate 3.6 per cent of the country’s total output.
    The figure is about 10 per cent for Canada, the US and France.
    One advantage of developing molten-salt reactors is that because they do not need so much water, China can build them in remote desert regions, away from its densely populated east coast.

    Work on two molten-salt reactors located in the Gobi Desert in Gansu province began in 2011. The 12-megawatt reactors were designed to show the viability of the technology and it is hoped they will be up and running by next year.
    “We have been conducting research in Shanghai, starting from nearly nothing,” Xu said. “And we now mastered the technology to produce key devices for such reactors, owning 202 patents.”
    China has invested about 2 billion yuan (US$300 million) over the past few years in molten-salt research and development, but building the plants will require tens of billions more.

    The basic technology was developed in America’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which invented the reactors in the 1970s but the US stopped developing them as it decided to concentrate on uranium-based reactors because of their military applications.
    “The US chose to focus on the uranium-based reactors,” said Luk Binglam, a nuclear engineering professor with City University of Hong Kong.
    “The reasons are not all technical. You need to consider the political climate at that time.”
    Xu told the MIT Technology Review in 2016 that Oak Ridge had posted most of the technical documents the Chinese team needed to develop the technology online for free.
    There are a number of practical hurdles to overcome if the researchers are to develop a commercially viable model, but if they succeed it could make China a leader in the industry.
    The development of cleaner and safer models could increase global demand for nuclear power, which has prompted widespread public concern in the wake of disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima.
    Some countries have banned its use and other places, including Germany and Taiwan, have moved to phase out their existing reactors.
    Leung said that another advantage of China developing the technology was that while it had to import uranium to power its current reactors, it had large reserves of thorium and would not need to rely on others for such crucial raw materials.

    • Replies: @d dan

    "How China hopes to play a leading role in developing next-generation nuclear reactors."
     
    China is also a leader in peaceful nuclear fusion research - breaking world record in controlled fusion time - over 100 seconds.
  81. @d dan

    "This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality..."
     
    Agree. Maybe the author's use of "nuclear parity" triggers those dumb ass to swarm here, contributing nothing to the discussion. Look: how can China achieve "parity" in anything to any white country. That's simply unacceptable.

    "I find the theory that the Chinese nuclear arsenal could actually be in the low four figures to be quite compelling..."
     
    From China's point of view, it is important to find out what foreigners think about 1000-nuke China. Like playing chess, you don't make a move unless you consider what others will do. The main countries to look out are the reactions of Russia, US, Japan and India.

    Also, a smaller stockpile makes it easier to maintain technological edge and upgrading. China and Russia currently have better missile technologies than US, so part of US quantitative advantage can be mitigated through better accuracy and multi-entry vehicle.

    It was also reported somewhere that China is the ONLY country that still deploy hydrogen bombs among the five "hydrogen bomb capable" countries. I don't know how accurate is this, but it fits well with China "diversity" strategy.

    IMO, China should not worry about the reactions from other countries.

    Does China want to be nuked and without a retaliatory strike?

    The answer should be obvious.

    Also, do it for all of us, not just the Chinese.

    • Replies: @d dan

    "IMO, China should not worry about the reactions from other countries."
     
    I understand the sentiment. But China need to know what other countries think before making the decision. For example, does China want to engage in nuclear arm race with India? Would Russia start to pressure China to join the nuclear arms control talk? etc.
  82. @Mr. Hack
    And the sad thing about these developments, as Pat Buchanan recently put it:

    The mighty malevolent China we face today was made in the USA.
     
    It looks like outsourcing so many manufacturing jobs to countries like China is going to figure high in Trump's reelection strategy:

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1258416273823805443

    As Pat Buchanan recently put it

    I believe it is an appropriate time to repost this wonderful video from 1990.

    A must watch for all those who want to understand the past.
    Thank you to whoever posted it first.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Damn, I missed this show. Was something I looked forward to every weekend.
  83. The following article might be interesting to the readers of this blog. The progress of Chinese semiconductor industry is remarkable and is just a matter of time before it catches up with Intel, Qualcomm and other top tier western chip makers who are all about to start losing their market share. https://www.asiatimesfinancial.com/huawei-to-dodge-us-sanctions-with-smic-chip?utm_campaign=ATF%20Daily%2015%20May%202020%20%28VyAfcn%29&utm_medium=email&utm_source=%2Amaster%2A%20Asia%20Times%20Financial%20-%20Subscribers&_ke=eyJrbF9lbWFpbCI6ICJrcmF1c21vc2Nvd0B5YWhvby5jb20iLCAia2xfY29tcGFueV9pZCI6ICJKR2V2cXAifQ%3D%3D

  84. @L.D.
    ” We achieved a lot in civilisational terms but we seem to be intent on flushing it all down the toilet.”

    Flushing down the toilet our unparalleled civilization is exactly what you and other commenters here seem to be suggesting we should do in the face of our current travails. We’re currently in a cultural and demographic down spiral, yes. Despairing and deciding to start shilling for an alien people with hardly any civilizacional accomplishments of their own is definitely not the answer.

    “So it’s obvious that a lot of white people are only able to feel good about themselves by clinging to the notion of white superiority. We might be a decadent declining civilisation but muh creativity!”

    Are you Jewish? Or just a self-hating White who internalised their propaganda and decided to redirect it into brown-nosing the chinks?

    “ All decadent declining civilisations do this. When the Greeks discovered that the Romans were now their masters they consoled themselves with muh creativity as well.”

    To use your less than sophisticated language and reasoning: MUH DECADENCE. We’ve been through that before: Greece, Rome, Middle Ages, etc. We bounced back, we can do it again. But if you despise the west so much I suggest you should leave. Let’s see if the chinks will want you there. Spoiler: they won’t.

    Aren’t you a Portuguese nigger? The main accomplishment of Portuguese niggers is creating the largest nigger colony in the New World.

  85. @Blinky Bill
    How China hopes to play a leading role in developing next-generation nuclear reactors.

    Chinese researchers have ambitious plans that could pave the way for cleaner, safer and more efficient reactors that could cut reliance on fossil fuels
    China is pushing ahead with ambitious plans for its nuclear industry, including developing cleaner and safer next-generation technology.
    A particular focus is a plan to develop the world’s first large-scale thorium-powered, molten-salt reactors – which could generate less radioactive waste and help reduce the reliance on fossil fuels to reduce the world’s energy needs – by 2020.
    The head of one of the country’s research programmes said Chinese researchers had mastered the technology in laboratories and now aimed to be the first in the world to make it commercially viable.
    Laurence Leung, a scientist with the Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, said China “is also leading the development of a few other models” and “is putting a lot of resources” into developing fourth-generation nuclear power.

    At present the country relies on nuclear technology from the United States and France, but hopes the heavy investment will allow it to play a leading role in the multinational Generation-IV International Forum.

    The forum, a 14-member intergovernmental R&D collaboration, aims to pool resources, allowing scientists to develop safer and cheaper next-generation systems.
    Other members include the US, France, Russia and Canada, while Britain, Brazil and Argentina hope to play a more active role in future.

    After whittling down nearly 100 proffered concepts, the forum is now focusing on developing six reactor models.
    “China wants to test all the fourth-generation concepts before moving forward,” said Leung, who is also an adjunct professor at the McMaster University in Canada and Xian Jiaotong University in China.

    “It’s still very cost-effective at the developing phase. Once you move to the commercial use, there is no turning back.”
    A major focus is developing thorium-based, molten-salt reactors – which scientists hope can be developed to help meet the world’s growing need for energy without contributing to global warming.

    These reactors are powered by controlled fission reactions in the same way as conventional uranium reactors.
    However, the technology could prove to be cheaper and cleaner, while the use of thorium – which is less radioactive than uranium – should generate less waste.
    Replacing water as a coolant with liquid molten salt could tap more of the energy available in radioactive materials and reduce the risk of a meltdown by slowing the nuclear reactions automatically if they get too hot.

    Xu Hongjie, director of China’s molten-salt programme, told an academic conference in Shanghai last month that China had mastered the technology in laboratories and planned to put it into commercial use by 2030 – before anyone else did so.
    The programme is led by the Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics, part of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
    China, the world’s largest electricity consumer, has already built 45 uranium-powered reactors, but these only generate 3.6 per cent of the country’s total output.
    The figure is about 10 per cent for Canada, the US and France.
    One advantage of developing molten-salt reactors is that because they do not need so much water, China can build them in remote desert regions, away from its densely populated east coast.

    Work on two molten-salt reactors located in the Gobi Desert in Gansu province began in 2011. The 12-megawatt reactors were designed to show the viability of the technology and it is hoped they will be up and running by next year.
    “We have been conducting research in Shanghai, starting from nearly nothing,” Xu said. “And we now mastered the technology to produce key devices for such reactors, owning 202 patents.”
    China has invested about 2 billion yuan (US$300 million) over the past few years in molten-salt research and development, but building the plants will require tens of billions more.

    The basic technology was developed in America’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which invented the reactors in the 1970s but the US stopped developing them as it decided to concentrate on uranium-based reactors because of their military applications.
    “The US chose to focus on the uranium-based reactors,” said Luk Binglam, a nuclear engineering professor with City University of Hong Kong.
    “The reasons are not all technical. You need to consider the political climate at that time.”
    Xu told the MIT Technology Review in 2016 that Oak Ridge had posted most of the technical documents the Chinese team needed to develop the technology online for free.
    There are a number of practical hurdles to overcome if the researchers are to develop a commercially viable model, but if they succeed it could make China a leader in the industry.
    The development of cleaner and safer models could increase global demand for nuclear power, which has prompted widespread public concern in the wake of disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima.
    Some countries have banned its use and other places, including Germany and Taiwan, have moved to phase out their existing reactors.
    Leung said that another advantage of China developing the technology was that while it had to import uranium to power its current reactors, it had large reserves of thorium and would not need to rely on others for such crucial raw materials.

    “How China hopes to play a leading role in developing next-generation nuclear reactors.”

    China is also a leader in peaceful nuclear fusion research – breaking world record in controlled fusion time – over 100 seconds.

    • Thanks: Blinky Bill
  86. @Astuteobservor II
    IMO, China should not worry about the reactions from other countries.

    Does China want to be nuked and without a retaliatory strike?

    The answer should be obvious.

    Also, do it for all of us, not just the Chinese.

    “IMO, China should not worry about the reactions from other countries.”

    I understand the sentiment. But China need to know what other countries think before making the decision. For example, does China want to engage in nuclear arm race with India? Would Russia start to pressure China to join the nuclear arms control talk? etc.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Why would China care at that point? At that point, China is more worried about being annihilated by an American first strike? Why would it care about India having 1000 nukes also at that point?

    Hell, if I was xi, I would go for 1000 nukes. Then encourage every Asian country to do the same.

  87. @L.D.
    ”The Chinese just needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect it. They are good to go.”

    Let me correct this sentence for you: The Chinese Communist Party (Did the chinks invent Communism by the way?) needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect ITSELF against the Chinese people and KEEP ITSELF in power. Good luck with that in the long run.

    “And I would consider paper, gunpowder and compass to be monumental inventions of human development and history.”

    You’re absolutely right. Problem is, 3 inventions in 5 thousand years of history is not exactly a spectacular track record, right? And what’s more important, you fail to grasp the essential, epistemological difference between technology and SCIENCE. Several civilisations have reached relatively sophisticated levels of technology but only the West came up with what what we define as science. The chinks didn’t invent calculus, chemistry, physics nor the modern medicine. We did.

    “China missed out on the first two industrial revolutions. Catching up during this 3rd one. Soon the 4th, AI/automation will have a head start with 5g.”

    As Shakespeare put it, PAST IS PROLOGUE. If the chinks were capable of a scientific revolution of their own they would have done it by now. And yet till 1978, when Deng started modernising the country (that is to say when they started adopting everything WE invented and opened themselves to OUR capital, after the disaster of Maoism), China was as backward as Africa. As to the notion that China will soon be a civilizacional beacon and will conquer the world... where have we heard that before? Wasn’t the Soviet Union going to be exactly that according to the talking heads in the 60s? And then didn’t they say the same about Japan in the 80s? Now the eggheads have a new shiny object to toy with: China. Well, China is a confederation of peoples speaking a multitude of different languages, being kept together by a totalitarian state. Like I said before, good luck to CCP in staying in power and keeping the country from breaking apart into several nations in the long run.

    “Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?”

    The adjective “retarded” would seem more aptly used to describe a civilisation that invented 3 thing in 5 thousand years and which until 1978 had a per capita income lower than Somalia, don’t you think? And as to the US supposedly being in the course of “waging full spectrum war” on the chinks: WE CAN ONLY WISH. I couldn’t care less about any kind of anti-Chinese propaganda from the American government, I speak for myself: I don’t want to live in a world remotely influenced by the Chinese in general nor by the CCP in particular. The chinks are VILE people: corrupt, authoritarian and vulgarly materialistic. It’s understandable that a guy like Anatoly, being Russian, fantasises about living in a global Chinkocracy, as his people have been slaves since forever and they can’t conceive life not being under someone’s boot. But why free white men would be waxing lyrical and having widely unrealistic wet-dreams about being ruled by a race of extremely physically unattractive yellow little thieves is utterly beyond me.

    If you read the Tao Teh Ching, you might want to consider that China is a different “kind” of civilization.

    And that’s s good thing, that the world has different experiments in living.

    The West is about accomplishing tremendous things, organizing life around the need to accomplish, creating immense pressure to accomplish – and the results have been tremendous, if that’s your kind of thing.

    China made a different experiment in living, based more on the Tao Teh Ching. And that book is against accomplishment, achievement, striving, struggling, trying to be superior, etc. It says be like water, which flows to the lowest places.

    Obviously a civilization that writes a book like that isn’t going to produce the kind of geniuses the West is so good at, but it might produce a more refined and enjoyable way of living – if that’s your kind of thing.

    Different types of people in the world.

    Sadly, modern China has abandoned its old way of doing things and is today just a cheap copy of the worst of the West, chiefly America. Astonishingly, it’s actually worse than America on those things that make America awful.

    Nothing is more sad than poor, desperate people here seeing China as an alternative to America – a product of the human desire for hope, which reality cannot conquer.

    • Troll: thetruth
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    AaronB have you travelled in China? And if yes, how would you brainstorm positive and negatives from your travelling impressions of China?

    I have never been in China, so am ultimately quite ignorant about it.

    Some positives I would imagine so far I would experience from visiting China -
    1. Very good culinary level.
    2. Bourgeois, almost Southern European kind of city in Shanghai.


    -

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)

  88. @d dan

    "IMO, China should not worry about the reactions from other countries."
     
    I understand the sentiment. But China need to know what other countries think before making the decision. For example, does China want to engage in nuclear arm race with India? Would Russia start to pressure China to join the nuclear arms control talk? etc.

    Why would China care at that point? At that point, China is more worried about being annihilated by an American first strike? Why would it care about India having 1000 nukes also at that point?

    Hell, if I was xi, I would go for 1000 nukes. Then encourage every Asian country to do the same.

  89. @Blinky Bill

    As Pat Buchanan recently put it
     
    I believe it is an appropriate time to repost this wonderful video from 1990.

    https://youtu.be/C8_W16d3d1M

    A must watch for all those who want to understand the past.
    Thank you to whoever posted it first.

    Damn, I missed this show. Was something I looked forward to every weekend.

  90. @Daniel Chieh
    China has been working on that, including thorium nuclear reactors which can't be weaponized.

    I never saw that as an actual advantage of a design for domestic use by a nuclear power. Weapons grade fissile material is valuable, the fact a reactor can produce it as a byproduct of power generation is icing on the cake. Now if you told me thorium reactors produce less radioactive waste then I might take that as a benefit, but they do not. In fact, the waste they generate is more hazardous in the “short” run than that made by traditional reactor designs. So not only are you deprived of valuable weapons grade plutonium, but you’re now stuck with a crapload of useless but extremely difficult to contain gamma emitting sludge.

    The optimal way forward for fission should be closed cycle fast breeder reactors burning uranium and plutonium. This has the advantage of having the highest fuel efficiency out of all possible designs, as well as reprocessing the vast majority of the waste fuel back into fissile material that can be fed back to the reactor or used in warheads. The only “downside” to this route is faggy bleating about “proliferation concerns” but in the case of existing nuclear powers the production of weapons grade material is a feature, not a bug. If you want to make more warheads with it you do it, otherwise just burn it again and make more electricity.

  91. @Kent Nationalist
    Your argument takes no account of the fact that Japanese culture is extremely popular in the rest of the world. Even Korean culture (although in more demotic forms like K-pop/TV serials) is popular in the rest of the world.

    As Europeans, we should be more embarrassed than the Chinese.

    They do not allow anti-Chinese propaganda to be produced within their political dominion. Neither do they allow anti-Chinese films to be produced in the West.

    Compared to us, that is quite impressive.

  92. @gT
    Yada, yada, yada. Short something or others can never rule this planet, didn't you guys learn anything from the Japs?

    Stage 1: Denial

  93. @AaronB
    If you read the Tao Teh Ching, you might want to consider that China is a different "kind" of civilization.

    And that's s good thing, that the world has different experiments in living.

    The West is about accomplishing tremendous things, organizing life around the need to accomplish, creating immense pressure to accomplish - and the results have been tremendous, if that's your kind of thing.

    China made a different experiment in living, based more on the Tao Teh Ching. And that book is against accomplishment, achievement, striving, struggling, trying to be superior, etc. It says be like water, which flows to the lowest places.

    Obviously a civilization that writes a book like that isn't going to produce the kind of geniuses the West is so good at, but it might produce a more refined and enjoyable way of living - if that's your kind of thing.

    Different types of people in the world.

    Sadly, modern China has abandoned its old way of doing things and is today just a cheap copy of the worst of the West, chiefly America. Astonishingly, it's actually worse than America on those things that make America awful.

    Nothing is more sad than poor, desperate people here seeing China as an alternative to America - a product of the human desire for hope, which reality cannot conquer.

    AaronB have you travelled in China? And if yes, how would you brainstorm positive and negatives from your travelling impressions of China?

    I have never been in China, so am ultimately quite ignorant about it.

    Some positives I would imagine so far I would experience from visiting China –
    1. Very good culinary level.
    2. Bourgeois, almost Southern European kind of city in Shanghai.

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)

    • LOL: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Bovril

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.
     
    Latitude is not the same thing as climate.

    Europe lies at a very northern latitude, but it has an Oceanic or Maritime climate with relatively mild winters due to warm ocean currents.

    Northern China has a Continental climate, which is a climate with large variation between hot summers and cold winters.

    Beijing has colder winters than London, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Brussels, Reykjavik, and Stockholm. It's about as cold as Oslo in the winter.

    Cities in northeastern China like Shenyang, Changchun, and Harbin have much colder winters than anywhere in Scandinavia.

    Shanghai gets about as cold as London does during the winter, though it gets much hotter than London in the summer while London is quite pleasant temperature wise in the summer.
    , @AaronB
    Food is good in China, but I think places like Japan and Thailand are better.

    China these days is just an aggressive, ambitious Western style technocratic country. Its more technocratic than the West and more about hustling and making a buck than America. People work too hard and life can be harsh and aggressive there. However there are some great and friendly people there.

    So overall I did not find the place inspiring. I didn't see much of that old Taoist sensibility that used to strike foreigners so much.

    Beijing is brutal in the winter - I was there in the winter.

    I see China as being in an aggressive expansionist phase - all countries go through that and that's when they are at their least charming, cultured, or interesting. So I'm not so hard on China - she had a brutal 19th and 20th centuries.

    Like you, I am curious about how the old Chinese spirit will reassert itself, in what interesting and surprising ways.
    , @yakushimaru
    Atlantic makes it warm far up north. It is not just the lattitude.
    , @Blinky Bill

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)
     

    Classic Dimitry. This is why I love your posts, never sure if your trolling or genuinely oblivious to the topic at hand. This requires great skill ! But in this case I refuse to believe you have never noticed Khabarovsk and Odessa have different climates despite having the same latitude. Reminds me of Lenin's exile to the "Siberian Riviera" in Shushenskoye.
    , @Blinky Bill

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.
     
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lipeng_Zhang6/publication/298914529/figure/fig3/AS:[email protected]/Map-of-the-Yin-Shang-Kingdom-Also-shown-are-the-distribution-of-tin-deposits-30-the.png

    The North China Plain and Loess Plateau is the Urheimat of the Han People and their Culture. It can be described in many ways, but semi tropics it is not.

    Hainan on the other hand does have nice tropical beaches with many Russians.

    www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-12/04/CmcetdE002001_20181203_MCMFN0A001_11n.jpg

    https://thetravelintern.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Sanya-Beach-in-Hainan-Visit-Hainan-Island.jpg

    https://thetravelintern.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Private-Beach-at-Raffles-Hainan-Hotel-Visit-Hainan-Island.jpg
  94. @Dmitry
    AaronB have you travelled in China? And if yes, how would you brainstorm positive and negatives from your travelling impressions of China?

    I have never been in China, so am ultimately quite ignorant about it.

    Some positives I would imagine so far I would experience from visiting China -
    1. Very good culinary level.
    2. Bourgeois, almost Southern European kind of city in Shanghai.


    -

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Latitude is not the same thing as climate.

    Europe lies at a very northern latitude, but it has an Oceanic or Maritime climate with relatively mild winters due to warm ocean currents.

    Northern China has a Continental climate, which is a climate with large variation between hot summers and cold winters.

    Beijing has colder winters than London, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Brussels, Reykjavik, and Stockholm. It’s about as cold as Oslo in the winter.

    Cities in northeastern China like Shenyang, Changchun, and Harbin have much colder winters than anywhere in Scandinavia.

    Shanghai gets about as cold as London does during the winter, though it gets much hotter than London in the summer while London is quite pleasant temperature wise in the summer.

    • Agree: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    I didn't say that latitude is the same as temperature.

    Although climate in China is generally of a country where you will need air conditioning.

    Aside from a bit colder winter, Shanghai has the same average temperatures as Middle Eastern cities like Jerusalem.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem#Climate
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai#Climate

    Beijing has a much colder winter - although it looks like a nice short winter - , but most of year climate is like Ankara.

  95. @hgv
    Slightly off-topic: doesnt the fact that it takes a nation 4.5 times its size to compete (and beat) the US speak volumes about its greatness? Imagine its power if there were 300 million white Americans, or 400, or 500...even China would then be only a satellite. I know that USA bashing is a popular sport the world over, but...when you realise how much that country is doing, with so little (by comparison)...it really deserves respect.

    “when you realise how much that country is doing, with so little (by comparison)…it really deserves respect.”

    When you consider how much Al Capone accomplished with so few henchmen, he really deserved respect.

    • Replies: @yakushimaru
    This is ridiculous. Did China invade Japan or what?
  96. @Dmitry
    AaronB have you travelled in China? And if yes, how would you brainstorm positive and negatives from your travelling impressions of China?

    I have never been in China, so am ultimately quite ignorant about it.

    Some positives I would imagine so far I would experience from visiting China -
    1. Very good culinary level.
    2. Bourgeois, almost Southern European kind of city in Shanghai.


    -

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)

    Food is good in China, but I think places like Japan and Thailand are better.

    China these days is just an aggressive, ambitious Western style technocratic country. Its more technocratic than the West and more about hustling and making a buck than America. People work too hard and life can be harsh and aggressive there. However there are some great and friendly people there.

    So overall I did not find the place inspiring. I didn’t see much of that old Taoist sensibility that used to strike foreigners so much.

    Beijing is brutal in the winter – I was there in the winter.

    I see China as being in an aggressive expansionist phase – all countries go through that and that’s when they are at their least charming, cultured, or interesting. So I’m not so hard on China – she had a brutal 19th and 20th centuries.

    Like you, I am curious about how the old Chinese spirit will reassert itself, in what interesting and surprising ways.

    • Troll: thetruth
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    In other words, this Zionist retarded troll wants China to give up all hard power so it can get raped again like the good ole days.

    Their wet dream is probably the same kinda of rape Russia received during the 1990s.

    How many retarded alt rights got the hint that their hate of China align with Zionists that they are suppose to hate?
    , @Dmitry
    From my impression of YouTube walking videos, in the Shanghai, the atmosphere and planning of the city (or most often filmed sectors of the city) feels similar to Madrid or another large Spanish city.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBqLWXT6u6g

    But in the supermarket, like some crazier version of the largest scale Russian supermarkets. Sunflower oil at 12:30

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-CJXPmKjMc

  97. @Dmitry
    AaronB have you travelled in China? And if yes, how would you brainstorm positive and negatives from your travelling impressions of China?

    I have never been in China, so am ultimately quite ignorant about it.

    Some positives I would imagine so far I would experience from visiting China -
    1. Very good culinary level.
    2. Bourgeois, almost Southern European kind of city in Shanghai.


    -

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)

    Atlantic makes it warm far up north. It is not just the lattitude.

  98. @Ultrafart the Brave
    "when you realise how much that country is doing, with so little (by comparison)…it really deserves respect."

    When you consider how much Al Capone accomplished with so few henchmen, he really deserved respect.

    This is ridiculous. Did China invade Japan or what?

    • Replies: @Ultrafart the Brave
    Que?

    Your comment does not compute.

    Brevity is normally a good thing, but it's no substitute for context.
    , @yakushimaru
    I wasn't reading. Sorry. This is embarrassing. My bad.
  99. @yakushimaru
    This is ridiculous. Did China invade Japan or what?

    Que?

    Your comment does not compute.

    Brevity is normally a good thing, but it’s no substitute for context.

  100. @yakushimaru
    This is ridiculous. Did China invade Japan or what?

    I wasn’t reading. Sorry. This is embarrassing. My bad.

  101. @L.D.
    “ First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization.”

    Who exactly is the Chinese Isaac Newton? The Chinese Darwin? The Chinese Copernicus? The Chinese Shakespeare? The Chinese Michelangelo? The Chinese Aristotle? The Chinese Beethoven? The Chinese Cervantes?

    As far as I can’t tell they’re nowhere to be seen. And yet the pro-China enthusiasts, who incessantly crow about it supposedly having “5 000 years of uninterrupted history” would have us believe that such a nation has indeed a glorious civilisation. Give me a break.

    What strikes me about China is how utterly unimpressive its accomplishments are for a people who has been around for so long.

    But now that Russia is well on the way to becoming a vassal state to the Chinese (providing it with cheap raw materials, as the Third World country it is) Anatoly has taken it upon himself to sing the praises of the future slanted-eyed masters of his defeated nation. What a joke! Not having a country to be proud of, he seems to have decided to outsource his patriotism to his neighbours. Sad.

    here is something for you to start!

    —————————————–
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Needham#Science_and_Civilisation_in_China

    Science and Civilisation in China by Joseph Needham
    Main article: Science and Civilisation in China

    In 1948, Needham proposed a project to the Cambridge University Press for a book on Science and Civilisation in China. Within weeks of being accepted, the project had grown to seven volumes, and it has expanded ever since. His initial collaborator was the historian Wang Ling (王玲), whom he had met in Lizhuang and obtained a position for at Trinity. The first years were devoted to compiling a list of every mechanical invention and abstract idea that had been made and conceived in China. These included cast iron, the ploughshare, the stirrup, gunpowder, printing, the magnetic compass and clockwork escapements, most of which were thought at the time to be western inventions. The first volume eventually appeared in 1954.

    The publication received widespread acclaim, which intensified to lyricism as the further volumes appeared. He wrote fifteen volumes himself, and the regular production of further volumes continued after his death in 1995. Later, Volume III was divided, so that 27 volumes have now been published. Successive volumes are published as they are completed, which means that they do not appear in the order originally contemplated in the project’s prospectus.

    Needham’s final organizing schema was:

    Vol. I. Introductory Orientations
    Vol. II. History of Scientific Thought
    Vol. III. Mathematics and the Sciences of the Heavens and Earth
    Vol. IV. Physics and Physical Technology
    Vol. V. Chemistry and Chemical Technology
    Vol. VI. Biology and Biological Technology
    Vol. VII. The Social Background

    See Science and Civilisation in China for a full list.

    The project is still proceeding under the guidance of the Publications Board of the Needham Research Institute, directed by Professor Mei Jianjun.[12]

  102. @L.D.
    “ First, it is more in line with the scale and grandeur of Chinese civilization.”

    Who exactly is the Chinese Isaac Newton? The Chinese Darwin? The Chinese Copernicus? The Chinese Shakespeare? The Chinese Michelangelo? The Chinese Aristotle? The Chinese Beethoven? The Chinese Cervantes?

    As far as I can’t tell they’re nowhere to be seen. And yet the pro-China enthusiasts, who incessantly crow about it supposedly having “5 000 years of uninterrupted history” would have us believe that such a nation has indeed a glorious civilisation. Give me a break.

    What strikes me about China is how utterly unimpressive its accomplishments are for a people who has been around for so long.

    But now that Russia is well on the way to becoming a vassal state to the Chinese (providing it with cheap raw materials, as the Third World country it is) Anatoly has taken it upon himself to sing the praises of the future slanted-eyed masters of his defeated nation. What a joke! Not having a country to be proud of, he seems to have decided to outsource his patriotism to his neighbours. Sad.

    Are you a western white? If so, I hope you realize that your people are just a few decades away from complete domination by and submission to foreign elements now gathering for the final demographic push. Ethnic Russians will still have their nation state and center of political, industrial, and military power 50 years from now. Western whites like yourself will be mere chattel in what was formerly your own homelands.

    • Replies: @Brutisss
    Why is that a bad thing?
  103. @d dan

    "This thread seems at high risk of being derailed by a unironic white supremacist who, in fits of unhinged fury, is in a complete meltdown over the reality..."
     
    Agree. Maybe the author's use of "nuclear parity" triggers those dumb ass to swarm here, contributing nothing to the discussion. Look: how can China achieve "parity" in anything to any white country. That's simply unacceptable.

    "I find the theory that the Chinese nuclear arsenal could actually be in the low four figures to be quite compelling..."
     
    From China's point of view, it is important to find out what foreigners think about 1000-nuke China. Like playing chess, you don't make a move unless you consider what others will do. The main countries to look out are the reactions of Russia, US, Japan and India.

    Also, a smaller stockpile makes it easier to maintain technological edge and upgrading. China and Russia currently have better missile technologies than US, so part of US quantitative advantage can be mitigated through better accuracy and multi-entry vehicle.

    It was also reported somewhere that China is the ONLY country that still deploy hydrogen bombs among the five "hydrogen bomb capable" countries. I don't know how accurate is this, but it fits well with China "diversity" strategy.

    “It was also reported somewhere that China is the ONLY country that still deploy hydrogen bombs among the five “hydrogen bomb capable” countries. I don’t know how accurate is this, but it fits well with China “diversity” strategy.”

    This is incorrect. All the major nuclear powers deploy thermonuclear warheads (almost?) exclusively. When nukes are discussed in the present context they are invariably thermonuclear ie fusion ie “h-bombs.” The last time a true fission device was in active deployment by one of the big 5 must have been several decades ago. I suppose it’s possible the very new “low yield” Trident warhead the US began introducing into service last year is a pure fission device, but even that is just a throttled down version of the thermonuclear W-76 warhead from the 70’s where they just probably removed the secondary stage and left the primary stage.

    • Replies: @d dan

    "All the major nuclear powers deploy thermonuclear warheads (almost?) exclusively."
     
    Thanks for the info. When I looked at the current US nuclear stocks, they were mostly less than 1 megaton yields, which gave me the impression that they were nuclear fission weapons. I guess US is very interested in the tactical uses of nuclear weapons.
  104. @Anonymous (n)
    "It was also reported somewhere that China is the ONLY country that still deploy hydrogen bombs among the five “hydrogen bomb capable” countries. I don’t know how accurate is this, but it fits well with China “diversity” strategy."

    This is incorrect. All the major nuclear powers deploy thermonuclear warheads (almost?) exclusively. When nukes are discussed in the present context they are invariably thermonuclear ie fusion ie "h-bombs." The last time a true fission device was in active deployment by one of the big 5 must have been several decades ago. I suppose it's possible the very new "low yield" Trident warhead the US began introducing into service last year is a pure fission device, but even that is just a throttled down version of the thermonuclear W-76 warhead from the 70's where they just probably removed the secondary stage and left the primary stage.

    “All the major nuclear powers deploy thermonuclear warheads (almost?) exclusively.”

    Thanks for the info. When I looked at the current US nuclear stocks, they were mostly less than 1 megaton yields, which gave me the impression that they were nuclear fission weapons. I guess US is very interested in the tactical uses of nuclear weapons.

  105. @Dmitry
    AaronB have you travelled in China? And if yes, how would you brainstorm positive and negatives from your travelling impressions of China?

    I have never been in China, so am ultimately quite ignorant about it.

    Some positives I would imagine so far I would experience from visiting China -
    1. Very good culinary level.
    2. Bourgeois, almost Southern European kind of city in Shanghai.


    -

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)

    Classic Dimitry. This is why I love your posts, never sure if your trolling or genuinely oblivious to the topic at hand. This requires great skill ! But in this case I refuse to believe you have never noticed Khabarovsk and Odessa have different climates despite having the same latitude. Reminds me of Lenin’s exile to the “Siberian Riviera” in Shushenskoye.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Where in my post is there a claim that latitude is the only determining factor for climate?

    Read posts, before replying - I'm comparing latitudes. I'm not comparing climates, although that is also interesting.

    E.g.

    Beijing has a similar average temperatures most of the year to Ankara (capital of Turkey), aside from having a bit colder in winter.

    While Shanghai has the same average temperatures as Middle Eastern cities like Jerusalem.

  106. @Dmitry
    AaronB have you travelled in China? And if yes, how would you brainstorm positive and negatives from your travelling impressions of China?

    I have never been in China, so am ultimately quite ignorant about it.

    Some positives I would imagine so far I would experience from visiting China -
    1. Very good culinary level.
    2. Bourgeois, almost Southern European kind of city in Shanghai.


    -

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    The North China Plain and Loess Plateau is the Urheimat of the Han People and their Culture. It can be described in many ways, but semi tropics it is not.

    [MORE]

    Hainan on the other hand does have nice tropical beaches with many Russians.

    http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-12/04/CmcetdE002001_20181203_MCMFN0A001_11n.jpg

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    https://www.instagram.com/p/B3ZgYwwIXch/
  107. @Blinky Bill

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.
     
    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lipeng_Zhang6/publication/298914529/figure/fig3/AS:[email protected]/Map-of-the-Yin-Shang-Kingdom-Also-shown-are-the-distribution-of-tin-deposits-30-the.png

    The North China Plain and Loess Plateau is the Urheimat of the Han People and their Culture. It can be described in many ways, but semi tropics it is not.

    Hainan on the other hand does have nice tropical beaches with many Russians.

    www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-12/04/CmcetdE002001_20181203_MCMFN0A001_11n.jpg

    https://thetravelintern.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Sanya-Beach-in-Hainan-Visit-Hainan-Island.jpg

    https://thetravelintern.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Private-Beach-at-Raffles-Hainan-Hotel-Visit-Hainan-Island.jpg

    View this post on Instagram

    🏝🏝🏝

    A post shared by Russia✈️China (@liiww__) on

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    Vs Xi'an.
    https://www.chinadiscovery.com/assets/images/xian/xian-weather/xian-winter-768.jpg
  108. @Blinky Bill
    https://www.instagram.com/p/B3ZgYwwIXch/

    Vs Xi’an.

    [MORE]

  109. @AaronB
    Food is good in China, but I think places like Japan and Thailand are better.

    China these days is just an aggressive, ambitious Western style technocratic country. Its more technocratic than the West and more about hustling and making a buck than America. People work too hard and life can be harsh and aggressive there. However there are some great and friendly people there.

    So overall I did not find the place inspiring. I didn't see much of that old Taoist sensibility that used to strike foreigners so much.

    Beijing is brutal in the winter - I was there in the winter.

    I see China as being in an aggressive expansionist phase - all countries go through that and that's when they are at their least charming, cultured, or interesting. So I'm not so hard on China - she had a brutal 19th and 20th centuries.

    Like you, I am curious about how the old Chinese spirit will reassert itself, in what interesting and surprising ways.

    In other words, this Zionist retarded troll wants China to give up all hard power so it can get raped again like the good ole days.

    Their wet dream is probably the same kinda of rape Russia received during the 1990s.

    How many retarded alt rights got the hint that their hate of China align with Zionists that they are suppose to hate?

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Not at all.

    It would be nice if China took the "middle way", as the ancient philosophy it has lived by for so long recommends, and acquired enough power for effective defense without being aggressive. It would also be nice if China took the middle way in regard to social organization, and had not opted to instead become a hyper-competitive ruthless society with an emphasis on social control, incessant hustling, and technocracy.

    As I said, I am very aware that the old Chinese society, as appealing to people like me as it was, was simply inadequate in dealing with the extremely effective and brutal Western powers - I just regret that all the accumulated wisdom of old China was unable to prevent China from seeing the only solution as becoming a more extreme version of the worst aspects of those Western powers.

    But at the same time, I see trends in human history as taking the shape they must, and as ultimately forming a harmonious pattern - so Chinese extreme overreaction and descent into barbarism in order to combat barbarism was probably a necessary stage at this point in history.

    So I am long term optimistic for China - its current ugliness will gradually morph into something more similar to or is mellow old Taoist spirit.

    I just find the silly people who actually think modern China represents a benign alternative to the West to be sad victims of the perennial human weakness of fantasizing that the enemy of what we suffer from must be good.

    So the China boosterism on Unz isn't "bad" - its just sad, and all too human and understandable.
    , @d dan

    "In other words, this Zionist retarded troll wants China to give up all hard power so it can get raped again like the good ole days."
     
    Agree he is a total retarded. He is also extremely arrogant. He knows a few pieces of Chinese philosophy / history and he thinks he know more about the path for China than anyone else. In some posts earlier, he even suggests there is NOT much in fundamental sciences to discover anymore, so Chinese should just move on with sciences. He feels sorry that China is working so hard on sciences. Maybe should concentrate on writing poems or something like that? Life would be so much "better".

    Yes, can't get more ridiculous than that.

  110. @Astuteobservor II
    Hard power beats everything else. Soft power means jack shit in the face of hard power.

    The Chinese just needs a huge economy and the weapons to protect it. They are good to go.

    And I would consider paper, gunpowder and compass to be monumental inventions of human development and history.

    China missed out on the first two industrial revolutions. Catching up during this 3rd one. Soon the 4th, AI/automation will have a head start with 5g.

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it's rise?

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?

    That’s not really a convincing argument. By the same logic, why would the U.S. spend trillions to attack Iraq if it wasn’t a threat? Well, incompetence is one answer.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Don't understand why you think Iraq and China are even in the same ball park when it comes to strategic value.

    Iraq was supposed to be a walk in the ballpark. Was supposed to be a net gain through oil. That was greed plus licking Zionist Israeli ass, and middle of the grand chess board crap. Your trillions is purely incompetence like you stated.

    Whilst China is a strategic rival who already has a bigger economy and soon to have military parity.

    Shitty comparison. My point stands.
  111. It has to be said, but more countries with nuclear weapons is not a positive thing for Russia. The less countries which have nuclear weapons, the better it is for those who have them. I’m seeing both people here suggest Russia would be better off if China had nuclear weapons, and even one person claimed China would be better off if more countries other than the U.S. had nuclear weapons. These people are not rational.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Bullshit.

    It makes perfect sense if China is in danger of getting annihilated through an American Nuclear first strike.

    Caring about what your neighbors think when some retard is about to kill you and your family with a bomb?

    You failed the intelligence test of my question in a previous comment.
  112. @Blinky Bill

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Beijing is almost the same latitude as Palermo (Sicily).

    Shanghai is almost the same latitude as Cairo (Egypt).

    Guangzhou is a more Southern latitude as Riyadh (Saudi Arabia).

    Shenzhen is the same latitude as the Saharan parts of African countries like Chad and Niger.

    Sanya (capital of Hainan in most Southern China) latitude is more south than Port Sudan (Sudan)
     

    Classic Dimitry. This is why I love your posts, never sure if your trolling or genuinely oblivious to the topic at hand. This requires great skill ! But in this case I refuse to believe you have never noticed Khabarovsk and Odessa have different climates despite having the same latitude. Reminds me of Lenin's exile to the "Siberian Riviera" in Shushenskoye.

    Where in my post is there a claim that latitude is the only determining factor for climate?

    Read posts, before replying – I’m comparing latitudes. I’m not comparing climates, although that is also interesting.

    E.g.

    Beijing has a similar average temperatures most of the year to Ankara (capital of Turkey), aside from having a bit colder in winter.

    While Shanghai has the same average temperatures as Middle Eastern cities like Jerusalem.

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill

    Read posts, before replying – I’m comparing latitudes. I’m not comparing climates, although that is also interesting.
     

    will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.
     
    Why are you comparing latitudes ? For what purpose ? Why are latitudes relevant to this dicussion ?

    Where in my post is there a claim that latitude is the only determining factor for climate?
     
  113. @Bovril

    Another thing people somehow do not discuss here in relation to China, is that it is a very Southern country geographically, and the culture will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.
     
    Latitude is not the same thing as climate.

    Europe lies at a very northern latitude, but it has an Oceanic or Maritime climate with relatively mild winters due to warm ocean currents.

    Northern China has a Continental climate, which is a climate with large variation between hot summers and cold winters.

    Beijing has colder winters than London, Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Brussels, Reykjavik, and Stockholm. It's about as cold as Oslo in the winter.

    Cities in northeastern China like Shenyang, Changchun, and Harbin have much colder winters than anywhere in Scandinavia.

    Shanghai gets about as cold as London does during the winter, though it gets much hotter than London in the summer while London is quite pleasant temperature wise in the summer.

    I didn’t say that latitude is the same as temperature.

    Although climate in China is generally of a country where you will need air conditioning.

    Aside from a bit colder winter, Shanghai has the same average temperatures as Middle Eastern cities like Jerusalem.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem#Climate
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai#Climate

    Beijing has a much colder winter – although it looks like a nice short winter – , but most of year climate is like Ankara.

  114. @Dmitry
    Where in my post is there a claim that latitude is the only determining factor for climate?

    Read posts, before replying - I'm comparing latitudes. I'm not comparing climates, although that is also interesting.

    E.g.

    Beijing has a similar average temperatures most of the year to Ankara (capital of Turkey), aside from having a bit colder in winter.

    While Shanghai has the same average temperatures as Middle Eastern cities like Jerusalem.

    Read posts, before replying – I’m comparing latitudes. I’m not comparing climates, although that is also interesting.

    will surely reflect quite a lot this Southern, semi-tropical climate.

    Why are you comparing latitudes ? For what purpose ? Why are latitudes relevant to this dicussion ?

    Where in my post is there a claim that latitude is the only determining factor for climate?

  115. @AaronB
    Food is good in China, but I think places like Japan and Thailand are better.

    China these days is just an aggressive, ambitious Western style technocratic country. Its more technocratic than the West and more about hustling and making a buck than America. People work too hard and life can be harsh and aggressive there. However there are some great and friendly people there.

    So overall I did not find the place inspiring. I didn't see much of that old Taoist sensibility that used to strike foreigners so much.

    Beijing is brutal in the winter - I was there in the winter.

    I see China as being in an aggressive expansionist phase - all countries go through that and that's when they are at their least charming, cultured, or interesting. So I'm not so hard on China - she had a brutal 19th and 20th centuries.

    Like you, I am curious about how the old Chinese spirit will reassert itself, in what interesting and surprising ways.

    From my impression of YouTube walking videos, in the Shanghai, the atmosphere and planning of the city (or most often filmed sectors of the city) feels similar to Madrid or another large Spanish city.

    But in the supermarket, like some crazier version of the largest scale Russian supermarkets. Sunflower oil at 12:30

    • Replies: @AaronB
    Shanghai does have its old European quarter which is nice, but I don't think that as of yet China has the same density of cultural character as Europe, Japan, or even America.

    For instance, that supermarket - its very big but it's kind if soulless and efficient. It lacks character. Go into a Whole Foods in Manhattan, and it's like being transported to another, more exotic world.

    Culture comes from relaxing conscious control, not controlling everything with logic so much, so that imagination has more space to develop.

    The trends in China is for the moment in the other direction - control, technology, science, etc. So the place has a kind if soulless feel to it for now, especially after the drabness of Communism, which was another kind of attempt at soulless hyper-control.

    Now, of course science and technology can coexist with art and imagination - Japan, Germany are good examples. And in fact the highest science and technology actually depends on a balance between logical control and imagination - your imagination has to be free enough to come up with improbable ideas, and to make unexpected connections, that you then examine through logic.

    But the trend in China right now is too focused on the logic and control side - which is probably why it isn't creative even in technology, much less art and culture. Its getting the balance all wrong - but as I said, its an understandable of unfortunate overreaction to the trauma of the last two centuries.

    So China isn't really interesting at the moment - except as a warning about being too soulless and controlling, which many Westerners wish we would be more like - but I have faith that the old spirit of China is indomitable and will rise again in interesting and surprising ways.

    Of course, it is just possible that China is slated to go the way of ancient Egypt - after 5,000 years of uninterrupted high civilization, it finally sank into the sands of time, and is no more.

    Interestingly, the ancient Egyptian type of civilization could not really survive its encounter with the dynamic new civilization of Rome and Greece - and the Chinese type of civilization may have been completely transformed by its encounter with the West beyond recovery.

    In which case, the likely - and best - outcome would be for China to break up once again into regional states with different cultures and values competing with each. A new phase of experimenting with life. Remember, Chinese history swings back and forth between a large empire and small states - and the latest "empire" version of China, depending on control, may be heading for a fall.

    It's possible both America and China, may break apart from the excesses of technocratic control and repression - like a bubble bursting - and all sorts of interesting life experiments will happen again in smaller regional states.

    Personally, what matters to me is that that old Taoist spirit survive somewhere in the world - I don't care if it's in China or the West. And I am grateful for the old history and culture of China, whatever happens to it now.
  116. @Astuteobservor II
    In other words, this Zionist retarded troll wants China to give up all hard power so it can get raped again like the good ole days.

    Their wet dream is probably the same kinda of rape Russia received during the 1990s.

    How many retarded alt rights got the hint that their hate of China align with Zionists that they are suppose to hate?

    Not at all.

    It would be nice if China took the “middle way”, as the ancient philosophy it has lived by for so long recommends, and acquired enough power for effective defense without being aggressive. It would also be nice if China took the middle way in regard to social organization, and had not opted to instead become a hyper-competitive ruthless society with an emphasis on social control, incessant hustling, and technocracy.

    As I said, I am very aware that the old Chinese society, as appealing to people like me as it was, was simply inadequate in dealing with the extremely effective and brutal Western powers – I just regret that all the accumulated wisdom of old China was unable to prevent China from seeing the only solution as becoming a more extreme version of the worst aspects of those Western powers.

    But at the same time, I see trends in human history as taking the shape they must, and as ultimately forming a harmonious pattern – so Chinese extreme overreaction and descent into barbarism in order to combat barbarism was probably a necessary stage at this point in history.

    So I am long term optimistic for China – its current ugliness will gradually morph into something more similar to or is mellow old Taoist spirit.

    I just find the silly people who actually think modern China represents a benign alternative to the West to be sad victims of the perennial human weakness of fantasizing that the enemy of what we suffer from must be good.

    So the China boosterism on Unz isn’t “bad” – its just sad, and all too human and understandable.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Reading this killed a few of my brain cells. Never gonna repeat this mistake again.
  117. @Astuteobservor II
    In other words, this Zionist retarded troll wants China to give up all hard power so it can get raped again like the good ole days.

    Their wet dream is probably the same kinda of rape Russia received during the 1990s.

    How many retarded alt rights got the hint that their hate of China align with Zionists that they are suppose to hate?

    “In other words, this Zionist retarded troll wants China to give up all hard power so it can get raped again like the good ole days.”

    Agree he is a total retarded. He is also extremely arrogant. He knows a few pieces of Chinese philosophy / history and he thinks he know more about the path for China than anyone else. In some posts earlier, he even suggests there is NOT much in fundamental sciences to discover anymore, so Chinese should just move on with sciences. He feels sorry that China is working so hard on sciences. Maybe should concentrate on writing poems or something like that? Life would be so much “better”.

    Yes, can’t get more ridiculous than that.

  118. @EldnahYm

    Never understand the retarded put downs China receives. If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?
     
    That's not really a convincing argument. By the same logic, why would the U.S. spend trillions to attack Iraq if it wasn't a threat? Well, incompetence is one answer.

    Don’t understand why you think Iraq and China are even in the same ball park when it comes to strategic value.

    Iraq was supposed to be a walk in the ballpark. Was supposed to be a net gain through oil. That was greed plus licking Zionist Israeli ass, and middle of the grand chess board crap. Your trillions is purely incompetence like you stated.

    Whilst China is a strategic rival who already has a bigger economy and soon to have military parity.

    Shitty comparison. My point stands.

    • Replies: @EldnahYm
    My point isn't dependent upon Iraq being in the same ballpark as China. The point is that U.S. hostility says little about the actual threat of a country. You said the following: "If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?" I think your reasoning is flawed here.

    It's besides my point, but I don't regard China as a strategic rival, or for that matter a particularly strategically interesting place. It's a densely populated, resource poor country that is going to be old before it becomes rich and has a bad habit of pissing off most of its neighbors. It was dumb enough for Imperial Japan to think the place had any value, the idea that a country like the U.S. should care about the place is even more absurd. Of course you and most foreign policy people think it's the most important place in the world. China may well prove to be a problem for Russia or Japan in the future, but for the U.S. it should be irrelevant.

    The only military rival the U.S. has ever had is Russia. The only economic rival it has ever had was the British Empire. The only trading partners it's likely to have a large long-term relationship with are Mexico and Canada. Everyone else,including China, are not that important.

  119. @EldnahYm
    It has to be said, but more countries with nuclear weapons is not a positive thing for Russia. The less countries which have nuclear weapons, the better it is for those who have them. I'm seeing both people here suggest Russia would be better off if China had nuclear weapons, and even one person claimed China would be better off if more countries other than the U.S. had nuclear weapons. These people are not rational.

    Bullshit.

    It makes perfect sense if China is in danger of getting annihilated through an American Nuclear first strike.

    Caring about what your neighbors think when some retard is about to kill you and your family with a bomb?

    You failed the intelligence test of my question in a previous comment.

    • Replies: @EldnahYm
    Naturally you provide zero compelling evidence that the U.S. is planning to launch a nuclear first strike. Much pathos however. If the post-WW2 actions of the U.S. show anything, it's that we only attack weak and defenseless countries. Attacking China is not on the cards. American leaders are crazy, but not as crazy as you imagine. Possibly not as crazy as you are.
  120. @AaronB
    Not at all.

    It would be nice if China took the "middle way", as the ancient philosophy it has lived by for so long recommends, and acquired enough power for effective defense without being aggressive. It would also be nice if China took the middle way in regard to social organization, and had not opted to instead become a hyper-competitive ruthless society with an emphasis on social control, incessant hustling, and technocracy.

    As I said, I am very aware that the old Chinese society, as appealing to people like me as it was, was simply inadequate in dealing with the extremely effective and brutal Western powers - I just regret that all the accumulated wisdom of old China was unable to prevent China from seeing the only solution as becoming a more extreme version of the worst aspects of those Western powers.

    But at the same time, I see trends in human history as taking the shape they must, and as ultimately forming a harmonious pattern - so Chinese extreme overreaction and descent into barbarism in order to combat barbarism was probably a necessary stage at this point in history.

    So I am long term optimistic for China - its current ugliness will gradually morph into something more similar to or is mellow old Taoist spirit.

    I just find the silly people who actually think modern China represents a benign alternative to the West to be sad victims of the perennial human weakness of fantasizing that the enemy of what we suffer from must be good.

    So the China boosterism on Unz isn't "bad" - its just sad, and all too human and understandable.

    Reading this killed a few of my brain cells. Never gonna repeat this mistake again.

  121. @Dmitry
    From my impression of YouTube walking videos, in the Shanghai, the atmosphere and planning of the city (or most often filmed sectors of the city) feels similar to Madrid or another large Spanish city.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBqLWXT6u6g

    But in the supermarket, like some crazier version of the largest scale Russian supermarkets. Sunflower oil at 12:30

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-CJXPmKjMc

    Shanghai does have its old European quarter which is nice, but I don’t think that as of yet China has the same density of cultural character as Europe, Japan, or even America.

    For instance, that supermarket – its very big but it’s kind if soulless and efficient. It lacks character. Go into a Whole Foods in Manhattan, and it’s like being transported to another, more exotic world.

    Culture comes from relaxing conscious control, not controlling everything with logic so much, so that imagination has more space to develop.

    The trends in China is for the moment in the other direction – control, technology, science, etc. So the place has a kind if soulless feel to it for now, especially after the drabness of Communism, which was another kind of attempt at soulless hyper-control.

    Now, of course science and technology can coexist with art and imagination – Japan, Germany are good examples. And in fact the highest science and technology actually depends on a balance between logical control and imagination – your imagination has to be free enough to come up with improbable ideas, and to make unexpected connections, that you then examine through logic.

    But the trend in China right now is too focused on the logic and control side – which is probably why it isn’t creative even in technology, much less art and culture. Its getting the balance all wrong – but as I said, its an understandable of unfortunate overreaction to the trauma of the last two centuries.

    So China isn’t really interesting at the moment – except as a warning about being too soulless and controlling, which many Westerners wish we would be more like – but I have faith that the old spirit of China is indomitable and will rise again in interesting and surprising ways.

    Of course, it is just possible that China is slated to go the way of ancient Egypt – after 5,000 years of uninterrupted high civilization, it finally sank into the sands of time, and is no more.

    Interestingly, the ancient Egyptian type of civilization could not really survive its encounter with the dynamic new civilization of Rome and Greece – and the Chinese type of civilization may have been completely transformed by its encounter with the West beyond recovery.

    In which case, the likely – and best – outcome would be for China to break up once again into regional states with different cultures and values competing with each. A new phase of experimenting with life. Remember, Chinese history swings back and forth between a large empire and small states – and the latest “empire” version of China, depending on control, may be heading for a fall.

    It’s possible both America and China, may break apart from the excesses of technocratic control and repression – like a bubble bursting – and all sorts of interesting life experiments will happen again in smaller regional states.

    Personally, what matters to me is that that old Taoist spirit survive somewhere in the world – I don’t care if it’s in China or the West. And I am grateful for the old history and culture of China, whatever happens to it now.

  122. @Astuteobservor II
    Don't understand why you think Iraq and China are even in the same ball park when it comes to strategic value.

    Iraq was supposed to be a walk in the ballpark. Was supposed to be a net gain through oil. That was greed plus licking Zionist Israeli ass, and middle of the grand chess board crap. Your trillions is purely incompetence like you stated.

    Whilst China is a strategic rival who already has a bigger economy and soon to have military parity.

    Shitty comparison. My point stands.

    My point isn’t dependent upon Iraq being in the same ballpark as China. The point is that U.S. hostility says little about the actual threat of a country. You said the following: “If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?” I think your reasoning is flawed here.

    It’s besides my point, but I don’t regard China as a strategic rival, or for that matter a particularly strategically interesting place. It’s a densely populated, resource poor country that is going to be old before it becomes rich and has a bad habit of pissing off most of its neighbors. It was dumb enough for Imperial Japan to think the place had any value, the idea that a country like the U.S. should care about the place is even more absurd. Of course you and most foreign policy people think it’s the most important place in the world. China may well prove to be a problem for Russia or Japan in the future, but for the U.S. it should be irrelevant.

    The only military rival the U.S. has ever had is Russia. The only economic rival it has ever had was the British Empire. The only trading partners it’s likely to have a large long-term relationship with are Mexico and Canada. Everyone else,including China, are not that important.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Well shit.

    First bullshit, then an epic attempt at a denial. In the process paints a picture of crazy level of irrationality for American foreign policy. Apparently USA invades Willy nilly with no thought into it's interests.

    TIL.

    I have been schooled.
    , @Malenfant
    China has a larger real economy, a military that's nearly on-par with America's and will soon surpass it, and it's nowhere near as resource-poor as you imagine. Besides, it's siphoning resources from client states in Africa and elsewhere as we speak.

    It is already rich. It is already powerful.

    If you don't see it as a strategic rival, you're blind or retarded. China might soon be holding the whip hand.
  123. @Astuteobservor II
    Bullshit.

    It makes perfect sense if China is in danger of getting annihilated through an American Nuclear first strike.

    Caring about what your neighbors think when some retard is about to kill you and your family with a bomb?

    You failed the intelligence test of my question in a previous comment.

    Naturally you provide zero compelling evidence that the U.S. is planning to launch a nuclear first strike. Much pathos however. If the post-WW2 actions of the U.S. show anything, it’s that we only attack weak and defenseless countries. Attacking China is not on the cards. American leaders are crazy, but not as crazy as you imagine. Possibly not as crazy as you are.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    This is not about USA is about to launch a nuclear first strike, this is about killing the option of that strike before US govt can even think about it.

    Get it yet shit for brains?
  124. @EldnahYm
    My point isn't dependent upon Iraq being in the same ballpark as China. The point is that U.S. hostility says little about the actual threat of a country. You said the following: "If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?" I think your reasoning is flawed here.

    It's besides my point, but I don't regard China as a strategic rival, or for that matter a particularly strategically interesting place. It's a densely populated, resource poor country that is going to be old before it becomes rich and has a bad habit of pissing off most of its neighbors. It was dumb enough for Imperial Japan to think the place had any value, the idea that a country like the U.S. should care about the place is even more absurd. Of course you and most foreign policy people think it's the most important place in the world. China may well prove to be a problem for Russia or Japan in the future, but for the U.S. it should be irrelevant.

    The only military rival the U.S. has ever had is Russia. The only economic rival it has ever had was the British Empire. The only trading partners it's likely to have a large long-term relationship with are Mexico and Canada. Everyone else,including China, are not that important.

    Well shit.

    First bullshit, then an epic attempt at a denial. In the process paints a picture of crazy level of irrationality for American foreign policy. Apparently USA invades Willy nilly with no thought into it’s interests.

    TIL.

    I have been schooled.

  125. @EldnahYm
    Naturally you provide zero compelling evidence that the U.S. is planning to launch a nuclear first strike. Much pathos however. If the post-WW2 actions of the U.S. show anything, it's that we only attack weak and defenseless countries. Attacking China is not on the cards. American leaders are crazy, but not as crazy as you imagine. Possibly not as crazy as you are.

    This is not about USA is about to launch a nuclear first strike, this is about killing the option of that strike before US govt can even think about it.

    Get it yet shit for brains?

    • Replies: @EldnahYm
    Why don't you post something more substantive that I can reply to. At the current rate of backtracking, you will be making the same arguments I am after about 5 more posts.
  126. @EldnahYm
    My point isn't dependent upon Iraq being in the same ballpark as China. The point is that U.S. hostility says little about the actual threat of a country. You said the following: "If the Chinese are so inept, why the fuck are we the USA waging a full spectrum war trying to stop it’s rise?" I think your reasoning is flawed here.

    It's besides my point, but I don't regard China as a strategic rival, or for that matter a particularly strategically interesting place. It's a densely populated, resource poor country that is going to be old before it becomes rich and has a bad habit of pissing off most of its neighbors. It was dumb enough for Imperial Japan to think the place had any value, the idea that a country like the U.S. should care about the place is even more absurd. Of course you and most foreign policy people think it's the most important place in the world. China may well prove to be a problem for Russia or Japan in the future, but for the U.S. it should be irrelevant.

    The only military rival the U.S. has ever had is Russia. The only economic rival it has ever had was the British Empire. The only trading partners it's likely to have a large long-term relationship with are Mexico and Canada. Everyone else,including China, are not that important.

    China has a larger real economy, a military that’s nearly on-par with America’s and will soon surpass it, and it’s nowhere near as resource-poor as you imagine. Besides, it’s siphoning resources from client states in Africa and elsewhere as we speak.

    It is already rich. It is already powerful.

    If you don’t see it as a strategic rival, you’re blind or retarded. China might soon be holding the whip hand.

  127. China has a larger real economy,

    During the Opium Wars, China had a larger economy than every single European country. They were a rival however to none of them, and were totally defenseless and backwards. If the size of the economy were a measure of a country’s strength, then Britain would never have been able to take over India. The size of the economy isn’t even a crude measure of a country’s capabilities, it’s a useless one.

    Countries with large populations have large economies. Big deal. If you’re going to use GDP PPP numbers, then India’s economy at about half the size of the U.S.’ must be about half as powerful. Of course, we all know that’s nonsense.

    a military that’s nearly on-par with America’s and will soon surpass it,

    I would take these rankings with a grain of salt if I were you. China’s military has yet to do anything of note. All of the talk about their capability is just that. We have nothing to actually evaluate their combat capabilities. Even by the extremely low standards of deployment, just having a wide naval presence, China has yet to do anything of note.

    When peopled talked about the threat of the Soviet Union to the U.S. post-WW2, they may have exaggerated a bit(the threat to Europe however was enormous), but they certainly had plenty to go on. They had more military production than everyone else combined, had just destroyed continental Europe’s largest power, had a young and fertile population, and were even showing signs of more technological accomplishment in military equipment. They also had a competing ideology which provided an alternative model and had enough subversiveness inside of hostile countries in North American and especially Europe that serious efforts had to be undertaken to curtail its influence. The Soviet Union was a genuine rival, and even today Russia is a military rival.

    In contrast to this, China has done zilch. All they have done is produce large amounts of paperwork on how to deal with Taiwan, while not actually doing anything. If this were any other country, people would be at least a little bit skeptical. But for whatever reason, the image of Chinese as ruthlessly efficient is a strong meme on the right.

    and it’s nowhere near as resource-poor as you imagine.

    Bullshit. When accounting for its population, China is poor in every important resource, including water. The country lacks oil and gas resources, and are even a net importer of coal. Keeping the lights on in China is reliant upon large shipments of oil and gas from the Middle East and Russia. If anything were to happen to just a fraction of the former, China as we know it would not be able to function.

    Besides, it’s siphoning resources from client states in Africa and elsewhere as we speak.

    Not in significant quantities. China’s overseas investments are A. for show and B. a subsidy to Chinese construction and heavy industry(which has suffered a great deal the last decade), with lots of local corruption and graft involved. European colonialism in Africa was a massive money losing venture, as for that matter is the U.S.’ current role as world policemen. Colonialism does not make countries rich, if anything it’s a drain. We have hundreds of years of evidence for this now, but I get the impression most people still think the opposite.

    China is still reliant upon raw material imports, most crucially oil from the Persian Gulf, a region far away.

    It is already rich. It is already powerful.

    Most of inland China is as poor as most Third World countries.

    If you don’t see it as a strategic rival, you’re blind or retarded. China might soon be holding the whip hand.

    The Soviet Union never managed to hold the whip, and they were far more threatening than China. China is a large trading country reliant upon a foreign currency, who in a decade will have a median somewhere between 45 and 50. China will not be a world power, and I highly doubt the Chinese want to be.

    • Replies: @Malenfant

    I would take these rankings with a grain of salt if I were you. China’s military has yet to do anything of note.
     
    What has the US military done in recent decades, besides embarrass itself? Doing "nothing of note" -- but not wasting men and treasure on nonsense, not crashing ships into each other, and growing at a rapid and steady rate all the while -- doesn't strike me as a bad strategy.

    Bullshit. When accounting for its population, China is poor in every important resource, including water. The country lacks oil and gas resources, and are even a net importer of coal.
     
    You're cherry picking.

    China relies on imports for some things, most notably oil. But they're the world's greatest producers and exporters of other things -- many other things -- from steel, to circuit boards, to industrial chemicals, and much more. They produce more aluminum than the rest of the world combined, and that's really just the tip of the iceberg.

    They also happen to be the world's largest producer of coal, by quite a significant margin. They import it only to feed their bottomless appetite for energy, which goes into the production of other goods.

    Simply put, China are an industrial powerhouse. They are the industrial powerhouse. If they decide to go on a wartime footing, no nation will be able to match them conventionally.

    This ain't 1850, and China has caught up. They've exceeded us in many ways.

    Most of inland China is as poor as most Third World countries.

     

    Perhaps. But have you been to Louisiana or rural Iowa lately?

    Besides, the USA has no cities to rival Shanghai or Beijing. No infrastructure to match China's high-speed rail lines, or even come close. And so on, and so forth...

    The Soviet Union never managed to hold the whip, and they were far more threatening than China. China is a large trading country reliant upon a foreign currency, who in a decade will have a median somewhere between 45 and 50. China will not be a world power, and I highly doubt the Chinese want to be.

     

    It's incredibly arrogant and foolish to believe that the Chinese aren't already a world power.

    Besides, TFR in China is currently 1.68. In the USA, it is 1.77.

    If the US is growing, it's because of immigration... largely undesirable immigration, which weakens rather than strengthens.

    The median age in China right now is 38.4 years. In the US, it is 38.2 years.

    The two countries are not that different in those regards. You speak as though the US has a TFR that's above replacement and a median age of 28 years --- you speak as though we are still in the 1950s.

    ...And, besides, China has the advantage of numbers -- more young people, more workers, more men who can fight. China has more youth, and in many ways it's the more vital and energetic society.
  128. @Astuteobservor II
    This is not about USA is about to launch a nuclear first strike, this is about killing the option of that strike before US govt can even think about it.

    Get it yet shit for brains?

    Why don’t you post something more substantive that I can reply to. At the current rate of backtracking, you will be making the same arguments I am after about 5 more posts.

    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    Back tracked my ass.

    The whole point of nuclear parity is to prevent a nuclear first strike. You think China should rely on the good graces of retards like you and aaronb?

    This fresh fucker is telling the Chinese to put their lives in the hands of a serial murderer. Don't worry, there is nothing to worry about.

    China really need to get more nukes, for all of us.
  129. @EldnahYm

    China has a larger real economy,
     
    During the Opium Wars, China had a larger economy than every single European country. They were a rival however to none of them, and were totally defenseless and backwards. If the size of the economy were a measure of a country's strength, then Britain would never have been able to take over India. The size of the economy isn't even a crude measure of a country's capabilities, it's a useless one.

    Countries with large populations have large economies. Big deal. If you're going to use GDP PPP numbers, then India's economy at about half the size of the U.S.' must be about half as powerful. Of course, we all know that's nonsense.


    a military that’s nearly on-par with America’s and will soon surpass it,
     
    I would take these rankings with a grain of salt if I were you. China's military has yet to do anything of note. All of the talk about their capability is just that. We have nothing to actually evaluate their combat capabilities. Even by the extremely low standards of deployment, just having a wide naval presence, China has yet to do anything of note.

    When peopled talked about the threat of the Soviet Union to the U.S. post-WW2, they may have exaggerated a bit(the threat to Europe however was enormous), but they certainly had plenty to go on. They had more military production than everyone else combined, had just destroyed continental Europe's largest power, had a young and fertile population, and were even showing signs of more technological accomplishment in military equipment. They also had a competing ideology which provided an alternative model and had enough subversiveness inside of hostile countries in North American and especially Europe that serious efforts had to be undertaken to curtail its influence. The Soviet Union was a genuine rival, and even today Russia is a military rival.

    In contrast to this, China has done zilch. All they have done is produce large amounts of paperwork on how to deal with Taiwan, while not actually doing anything. If this were any other country, people would be at least a little bit skeptical. But for whatever reason, the image of Chinese as ruthlessly efficient is a strong meme on the right.


    and it’s nowhere near as resource-poor as you imagine.
     
    Bullshit. When accounting for its population, China is poor in every important resource, including water. The country lacks oil and gas resources, and are even a net importer of coal. Keeping the lights on in China is reliant upon large shipments of oil and gas from the Middle East and Russia. If anything were to happen to just a fraction of the former, China as we know it would not be able to function.

    Besides, it’s siphoning resources from client states in Africa and elsewhere as we speak.
     
    Not in significant quantities. China's overseas investments are A. for show and B. a subsidy to Chinese construction and heavy industry(which has suffered a great deal the last decade), with lots of local corruption and graft involved. European colonialism in Africa was a massive money losing venture, as for that matter is the U.S.' current role as world policemen. Colonialism does not make countries rich, if anything it's a drain. We have hundreds of years of evidence for this now, but I get the impression most people still think the opposite.

    China is still reliant upon raw material imports, most crucially oil from the Persian Gulf, a region far away.


    It is already rich. It is already powerful.
     
    Most of inland China is as poor as most Third World countries.

    If you don’t see it as a strategic rival, you’re blind or retarded. China might soon be holding the whip hand.
     
    The Soviet Union never managed to hold the whip, and they were far more threatening than China. China is a large trading country reliant upon a foreign currency, who in a decade will have a median somewhere between 45 and 50. China will not be a world power, and I highly doubt the Chinese want to be.

    I would take these rankings with a grain of salt if I were you. China’s military has yet to do anything of note.

    What has the US military done in recent decades, besides embarrass itself? Doing “nothing of note” — but not wasting men and treasure on nonsense, not crashing ships into each other, and growing at a rapid and steady rate all the while — doesn’t strike me as a bad strategy.

    Bullshit. When accounting for its population, China is poor in every important resource, including water. The country lacks oil and gas resources, and are even a net importer of coal.

    You’re cherry picking.

    China relies on imports for some things, most notably oil. But they’re the world’s greatest producers and exporters of other things — many other things — from steel, to circuit boards, to industrial chemicals, and much more. They produce more aluminum than the rest of the world combined, and that’s really just the tip of the iceberg.

    They also happen to be the world’s largest producer of coal, by quite a significant margin. They import it only to feed their bottomless appetite for energy, which goes into the production of other goods.

    Simply put, China are an industrial powerhouse. They are the industrial powerhouse. If they decide to go on a wartime footing, no nation will be able to match them conventionally.

    This ain’t 1850, and China has caught up. They’ve exceeded us in many ways.

    Most of inland China is as poor as most Third World countries.

    Perhaps. But have you been to Louisiana or rural Iowa lately?

    Besides, the USA has no cities to rival Shanghai or Beijing. No infrastructure to match China’s high-speed rail lines, or even come close. And so on, and so forth…

    The Soviet Union never managed to hold the whip, and they were far more threatening than China. China is a large trading country reliant upon a foreign currency, who in a decade will have a median somewhere between 45 and 50. China will not be a world power, and I highly doubt the Chinese want to be.

    It’s incredibly arrogant and foolish to believe that the Chinese aren’t already a world power.

    Besides, TFR in China is currently 1.68. In the USA, it is 1.77.

    If the US is growing, it’s because of immigration… largely undesirable immigration, which weakens rather than strengthens.

    The median age in China right now is 38.4 years. In the US, it is 38.2 years.

    The two countries are not that different in those regards. You speak as though the US has a TFR that’s above replacement and a median age of 28 years — you speak as though we are still in the 1950s.

    …And, besides, China has the advantage of numbers — more young people, more workers, more men who can fight. China has more youth, and in many ways it’s the more vital and energetic society.

    • Replies: @Blinky Bill
    Malenfant you're a heavy hitter, you should come in to bat more often.
  130. @EldnahYm
    Why don't you post something more substantive that I can reply to. At the current rate of backtracking, you will be making the same arguments I am after about 5 more posts.

    Back tracked my ass.

    The whole point of nuclear parity is to prevent a nuclear first strike. You think China should rely on the good graces of retards like you and aaronb?

    This fresh fucker is telling the Chinese to put their lives in the hands of a serial murderer. Don’t worry, there is nothing to worry about.

    China really need to get more nukes, for all of us.

  131. @Malenfant

    I would take these rankings with a grain of salt if I were you. China’s military has yet to do anything of note.
     
    What has the US military done in recent decades, besides embarrass itself? Doing "nothing of note" -- but not wasting men and treasure on nonsense, not crashing ships into each other, and growing at a rapid and steady rate all the while -- doesn't strike me as a bad strategy.

    Bullshit. When accounting for its population, China is poor in every important resource, including water. The country lacks oil and gas resources, and are even a net importer of coal.
     
    You're cherry picking.

    China relies on imports for some things, most notably oil. But they're the world's greatest producers and exporters of other things -- many other things -- from steel, to circuit boards, to industrial chemicals, and much more. They produce more aluminum than the rest of the world combined, and that's really just the tip of the iceberg.

    They also happen to be the world's largest producer of coal, by quite a significant margin. They import it only to feed their bottomless appetite for energy, which goes into the production of other goods.

    Simply put, China are an industrial powerhouse. They are the industrial powerhouse. If they decide to go on a wartime footing, no nation will be able to match them conventionally.

    This ain't 1850, and China has caught up. They've exceeded us in many ways.

    Most of inland China is as poor as most Third World countries.

     

    Perhaps. But have you been to Louisiana or rural Iowa lately?

    Besides, the USA has no cities to rival Shanghai or Beijing. No infrastructure to match China's high-speed rail lines, or even come close. And so on, and so forth...

    The Soviet Union never managed to hold the whip, and they were far more threatening than China. China is a large trading country reliant upon a foreign currency, who in a decade will have a median somewhere between 45 and 50. China will not be a world power, and I highly doubt the Chinese want to be.

     

    It's incredibly arrogant and foolish to believe that the Chinese aren't already a world power.

    Besides, TFR in China is currently 1.68. In the USA, it is 1.77.

    If the US is growing, it's because of immigration... largely undesirable immigration, which weakens rather than strengthens.

    The median age in China right now is 38.4 years. In the US, it is 38.2 years.

    The two countries are not that different in those regards. You speak as though the US has a TFR that's above replacement and a median age of 28 years --- you speak as though we are still in the 1950s.

    ...And, besides, China has the advantage of numbers -- more young people, more workers, more men who can fight. China has more youth, and in many ways it's the more vital and energetic society.

    Malenfant you’re a heavy hitter, you should come in to bat more often.

  132. @Anonymous (n)
    Are you a western white? If so, I hope you realize that your people are just a few decades away from complete domination by and submission to foreign elements now gathering for the final demographic push. Ethnic Russians will still have their nation state and center of political, industrial, and military power 50 years from now. Western whites like yourself will be mere chattel in what was formerly your own homelands.

    Why is that a bad thing?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS