They dont have a good track record on UN deployments, but they dont really care about them either.

china will get molly-whopped by america
culturally, the chinese just don't have what it takes to convince people to fight for them and to fight well
they lack the moral law and they fight to satisfy their spleens, not for victory
it'll be another iraq

>>65547952
>china doesnt have the appetite for victory
>unlike america, a country that hasnt won a war since grenada
what did he mean by this?

>>65547919
China is going to seem to have great tech on paper until about two weeks into the war when America has destroyed all of China's vulnerable UHF/VHF radars and their backscatters, and most of their satellites are space debris.
The USA will have destroyed a few dozen of their warships at this point, and the century of Chinese humiliation will start over from 2026.

>>65547952
mollywhopped isn't quite the right word for it, it will look like a drunk British footballer just left the pub to pick his delinquent kid up from the playground and everyone else at recess has to watch the playground bully get his ass beat by a 350 pound gorilla.

>>65547957
i saw this happen once
the neighborhood hooligan picked the bully up and sent him flying into brambles
went to jail for 5 years and his own kid got raped by the step father
football has replaced jesus

>>65547919
Can't wait till xinnie passes so china and america can be bros again.

>>65547979
thankfully he has created a culture of silence and subterfuge so all the people close to him are secretly our friends

>>65547955
>meanwhile Chyna has complete zero war fighting experience
what did smoothbrain mean by this

>>65547919
>are the people using it any good?
China hasn't had any substantial military engagements since like the '70s so there's no way to know for certain. For what it's worth, they have been beating the shit out of jeets in the Himalayas when they fight with literal sticks and stones, but the average indian man is physically weaker than teenaged white woman so that might not mean much.
I wouldn't be surprised if their entire organizational or command structure gets paralyzed if actual war breaks out because they don't have any NCOs with real combat experience or any other institutional warfighting knowledge. Western militaries getting involved in a bunch of different conflicts even if it's in a minor way mean they have some degree of battlefield experience. China should've gotten involved in some minor conflict just to test their army, like Burma for example is in their backyard having a civil war but they're just selling weapons to both sides. I suspect the reason why China is reluctant to actually use their military is the result of their face-saving culture, the Chinese wouldn't be able to mentally handle even a minor defeat and they probably aren't actually confident in their military, so they just try to look tough on paper and hope that deterrent is enough.

>>65547955
America lost Gulf I?

File: 20261004.jpg (142 KB, 1494x880)

142 KB JPG

USA should sell F-35s to CHINA

>>65548038
They’ve had some in the 70s and 80s. Also while the point you and others make shouldn’t be discarded, it does feel like a cheap gotcha without much thought beyond it. So many other countries haven’t recently fought wars either, yet your standard isn’t applied to them. And I’m not sure how relevant of an experience fighting in GWOT is in a present day, conventional peer-to-peer war…. That experience certainly isn’t useless as I’m guessing it stress-tests your systems, making behind the scenes stuff functional, practicing your basics, but a US-China war is gonna be very different.

>>65547952
Or another Iran.

>>65548126
>So many other countries haven’t recently fought wars either
NATO (and thus America) has been using Ukraine to study Russia's every move and possible tactic. America can conduct military operarions across the globe with very good results with little to no economic struggle. China has no ability to wage a war without economic collapse. All they can do is spread propaganda.

>>65548171


Iran is the folly of a mentally prolapsed pedophile trying to create "noise" to distract from his consanguineous family's corruption and collusion with other pedophiles. It's not a real war. It's the misappropriation of American steel for misdeeds, hated from within by our own soldiers, and I categorically denounce it.

File: IMG_8132.jpg (1.04 MB, 1423x805)

1.04 MB JPG

>>65548038

>>65548126
>So many other countries haven’t recently fought wars either, yet your standard isn’t applied to them.
What countries haven't participated in a war in 50 years but still have people hyping them up against a much more experienced and better equipped opponent?

>That experience certainly isn’t useless as I’m guessing it stress-tests your systems, making behind the scenes stuff functional
That's exactly what we're talking about, and why China will have massive problems in a hot war that the US won't.

>>65548276
It's very annoying to see people trying to convince me of things they obviously don't believe themselves.

>>65548278

I'll see your balloon and raise you one Nancy Pellosi.

>>65548171
isolating and striking inside Iran has been a great success actually so what's ur point? That Hormuz traffic has dropped?
>mfw Russia ivading Ukraine created a worse gas price hike than what Iran can dream of

wonder is this Chinaman gets paid or is just mentally ill?
how else can one """man""" endure this daily humiliation ritual for so long?

>>65548276
alright calm down baby boy I understand that this is the first US military conflict you've been alive during but this shit is not how you're describing it, damn

>>65548126
>muh peer war
>while sucking off the country that had nothing but small-scale border conflicts for half a century
Bugs aren't sending their brightest. Also the US has no peer right now given the supposed 2nd army of the world just crashed into what they claimed for decades would just be a speedbump and the other is too busy policing their own people so they don't collapse into civil conflict.

>>65548278
>the might of Chyna's spying power is a weather balloon

>>65548292
>great success
What did it achieve? Regime carries on. They didn't give up nuclear ambitions.

>>65548282

Fuck you. I want a just war. I want a righteous, noble cause for my generation that has had nothing but bombing peasants, moral ambiguity and erosion of liberty in the name of fighting an unkillable concept like "Terror". I want resolution. I want absolution. I want death. I want to drown the world in chink and russian blood.

>>65548326
Enlist.

>>65548300
>Regime carries on
old leader is dead, new leaders are "carrying on" into an economic disaster. Great.
>They didn't give up ambitions.
HAHAHA is this is the Iranian "Thoughts & Prayers"? If they pray to Pedo God hard enough, perhaps a nuke with materialize before them

>>65548326
who let the actual 14 year old in here

This is just yet another spam thread by the same posters.

>>65548336
>old leader is dead
the leader is just a figurehead for the institutions

>>65547919
China is afraid of any country stronger than Tibet or Mongolia.

>>65548040
chinese govt, despite all their sabre-rattling, is likely also scared shitless of losing the "mandate of heaven" if they fuck up and lose even an inconsequential war. they have so many examples across their history of this instantly fracturing the country into tiny bits that they're probably very hesitant to do it again.

>>65548285
I still get a chuckle about that. Such screeching and nothing happened. Reminds me of those red line jokes.

File: performative nation signalling.webm (2.88 MB, 1920x1080)

2.88 MB WEBM

>>65548520

>>65548545
>literal chinkbot posting

>>65548522
Kek that among with various news outlets covering China's warning

File: chinaconstruction.webm (2.98 MB, 540x960)

2.98 MB WEBM

Implessive!

>>65548522
top kek

>>65548522
The mighty wolf warriors in action.

File: 2ang.jpg (207 KB, 1920x1080)

207 KB JPG

>>65548522
>>65548575
Winter is coming

>>65548273
America, and nato, have been sleeping fully at the wheel in the ukraine invasion. Drip feeding military aid and near zero feedback from ukranian experience back into the domestic militaries. Thus you end up with majority of patriot interceptors depleted on shooting down fucking sahsneeds and every time pidors probe the airspace, expensive jets are sent up to warch them fly.

Only saving grace big western nations have is that they are geographically protected from direct contact with pidorstan. So the price for hubris will be payed by everyone in between them

>>65548295
US can't even deal with zuttslamics in the persian gulf since there is zero will to fight. US will be accelerating its drift towards full blown, retreat the troops type isolationism post donald guaranteed.

>>65547952
>So these people would never fight
>But also they can convince entire divisions to run head first into machine gun fire in human wave attacks

>>65550839
implessive

>>65550842
who said anything about machinegun fire and human wave attacks?

>>65550842
>convince
>conscript army
pick one

>>65548326
War isn't noble and never had been, child.

>>65547919
China has a fair bit of experience with warfare. Nah man, I don't think they're just fucking around. That said I strongly believe if it came down to a serious all-out (barring nukes) conflict with the US - today - they'd lose very badly. Not as bad as the mid-1800s, but close enough.

>>65547952
Yes good idea retard. In no way has underestimating your opponent and not frankly addressing their advantages and your own weaknesses ever gone badly. Just pretend like there isn't a problem, don't prepare at all, and assume that victory will be handed to you by God

>Underestimate Vietnam and Afghanistan
>Lose to peasants

>Overprepare for Gulf War 1 and go in with a massive force and a coherent meticulous plan
>Body them

Huh weird, must be a coincidence

>>65548276
>Literally a war to distract from the US president being a pedophile
>Screeches about Iran being a pedophile

Was this a Freudian slip?

>>65551128
>underestimate vietnam and afghanistan
>lose to peasants
there's the classic thirdie hyperbolic wordplay.
>beat the shit out of enemy
>do not eradicate every single last one of their people
>get bored
>leave
>those that survived "beat you because you underestimated them"
you're making an apples to oranges comparison because you're retarded.
>was this a freudian slip
it's an accurate assessment that iran's leaders are pedophiles, which suddenly doesn't matter anymore when they're iranian, apparently.

>>65548349
not in thirdie dictatorships, they're not.

Here's the reality, so that everyone can stop posting:

China will win a defensive war against the United States. It has defensive depth, a defense industrial base, is approaching technological parity, and sufficient nationalism and tolerance for casualties to motivate a war of homeland defense and win it, not to mention a nuclear deterrent. The US would not be able to hold territory in mainland China and doesn't have the domestic support to do so. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a jingoistic retard and the kind of person responsible for every war the US has ever lost.

Defense of Taiwan would likely end in a draw and US victory by default, but that assumes that the Trump administration has any intention of honoring the US commitment to defend Taiwan, which he doesn't. He identifies more with Xi and Putin than he does with any democracy fighting for survival, unless they have blackmail on him, like Israel. In Trump's world might makes right and the little guy is at fault for being a loser and needing help in the first place. This is demonstrable from the way he stabbed Ukraine in the back. If China is smart they will just bribe him with some kind of resources like oil or minerals and give him a face-saving way to say that he "made a deal" and so that he can declare US victory, and then let them do whatever they want.

Chinese invasion of the US ends before they even make landfall. They simply don't have the power projection.

/thread

>>65551141
What was the strategic objective in Vietnam and Afghanistan again? Did we achieve any those objectives? Who ruled the country ultimately in either case?

Let's be clear: you have a child's understanding of geopolitics. You think that wars are won by K:D ratio and a face saving retreat (ie "We didn't take THAT many pointless casualties" and "we didn't lose, it was the puppet government that we installed and left holding the bag with zero organic support", and "there's a Mcdonalds in Hanoi so it's like a Civ 5 cultural victory")

Maybe when you grow up you'll understand that wars are won by whoever is in charge at the end of the day, and success is measured in tangible gains. I'm waiting on your detailed rundown on what those gains were which that made the deaths of thousands of US troops worth it in either case, but you're clearly not smart enough to debate me seriously. Or you're another Israel shill in which case you can fuck off to hell where you spawned, parasite.

>iran's leaders are pedophiles

Not denying that but there is exactly as much evidence that the Iranian leadership are pedophiles as there is for Trump being a pedophile, and Israel has the highest per capita rate of pedophilia and the laxest anti-pedo laws of any developed country in the world so maybe, if you live in a glass house...

It's likely one of their biggest problems.
Don't get me wrong, you can probably find fighter pilots pulling hooligan bullshit anywhere on the planet.
That's never been the issue, but in terms of air planning they're likely scratching their heads at how to replicate the gulf war model.
There's probably planners around the world looking at the hormussy right now and slowly realizing that that kind of warfare is an anomaly in near peer conflicts (the gulf war was 100% a near peer conflict regardless of how it played out)

>>65551400
>b-but
we were talking about combat effectiveness, that's what the conversation was about, this is /k/, and as always, you instantly try to use doublespeak to imply
>the US would lose in direct combat with china
>w-well they wouldn't actually but the US lost politically in vietnam so they'll lose kinetically in china
>b-because they chose not to curbstomp north vietnam and left the conflict after signing a peace treaty

your dishonesty and intentional attempt to twist the past to imply the present is the problem, not whether or not you think the US achieved it's goals in vietnam, every time you instantly try to switch the conversation to make it about that you discredit yourself.

>hey guys, china has far less combat experience and general technical inferiority to the US, they are going to lose kinetically to the US the same way vietnam and afghanistan lost kinetically
>A-AHA BUT THE US LEFT VIETNAM AFTER BEATING THEM UP SO YOU DIDN'T COMPLETE THE OBJECTIVE!

the conversation isn't about that, it's about who's winning the fight, not who "accomplishes their political objectives"
>you have a child's understanding of geopolitics
you have a dishonest toddler's comprehension of language and how it is supposed to be used.

if two men are locked in unarmed combat, and someone asks:
who's going to win in this fight?

what they're asking is: by the end of that fight, who will be laying down on the floor with missing teeth and broken bones, and who's going to be standing up and walking away without the help of paramedics.

in your fantasy interpretation of the english language, you answer:
>hehe the guy standing up lost, because the cops arrested him later.

this is how toddlers argue, you are a toddler.

>>65548575
Some of these are just impressive honestly. Like how is it even possible to engineer a parking garage such that individual cars can fall through the ceiling without any greater collapse?

>>65551446
Separating raw head-to-head combat scenarios and broader, long term objectives is extremely difficult for some people. Even on the weapons board.

>>65551469
NTA but I think it's less about that, and more about them trying to twist reality until there's a way to conclude that the USA can lose a formal war. And then the result is what we see here, where completely irrelevant concepts become central to their reasoning, since the truth is overwhelmingly not in their favor.

>>65551479
both really, my point with >>65551446
is that with these faggots it's never actually about having an interesting back and forth, it is about them jamming a fucking crowbar into the fucking conversation as hard as physically possible until they can shove in the claim that "the US will lose" in any way shape and form, no matter how trite, no matter how semantic, because that is literally the only thing that matters to him in the conversation.

it's such a copout
>in vietnam, the US chose not to invade north vietnam but kinetically BTFO'd north vietnamese forces throughout the entire conflict, exited the conflict with a status quo peace treaty
>north korea broke this peace treaty and then attacked south korea without any US interference at this point
>therefore, the US lost in this new conflict that it was literally not even a part of
>in afghanistan, the US instantly and with ease, took over the entire country and occupied it virtually unopposed for 20 years
>but because they failed at nationbuilding and decided enough was enough and left, they suddenly magically lost kinetically against goatherders (rather than, just, y'know, leaving), something which must now be repeated 24/7 whenever technical discussion on US fighting ability is had.

>because of these past examples of the US losing politically because their occupation of another country didn't work out, they will now lose kinetically in a fight where china has to:
>invade a highly defended country with US naval support from the sea, and then completely occupy the country and make it mainland chinese forever.

it's completely retarded, their own examples show that this doesn't work out for the attacker in the long run, and they will "lose politically", but now that it's china, apparently this no longer matters.

>>65551514
*north vietnam broke this peace treaty, and then attacked south vietnam without any US interference at this point.

>>65547919
>>65547952
>>65547956
>>65548040
I genuinely never understand the point of these threads. I think the Chinese are well aware that they would lose a direct military conflict against the US, but they also understand that a direct war would instantly destroy the entire global order almost instantly. So neither side has much incentive to commit to one.
China’s military policy seems to be built almost entirely around what is basically an “I’m not touching you” game with its neighbours and they seemingly have very little desire for foreign interventions. Why would they? They can simply support whichever side is strongest and seemingly don’t care much whether that side is the Taliban, an ethnic supremacist movement, or a military junta.
The same applies to the Taiwan question. This isn’t me saying we should simply let it happen, but these Birchian fantasies about “destroying Red China” are just weird. It’s an endless cycle of people reassuring each other that they’ll destroy the cowardly chinks, even though China’s rise has not primarily been driven by military power. If anything, a major conflict would likely push China to rely even more heavily on partners like Russia and potentially Pakistan, to do the fighting for them.

>>65551529
>>I genuinely never understand the point of these threads.
>"Here's how America will fall and the multipolar world will take over"

>>65551533
that's generally what most of these china threads devolve into.
idk why the ones that make them always get so upset when people just don't take any thread about china seriously anymore.

as it turn out, when you target a board with pro-chinese propaganda for years and years, people just start making the assumption that china threads are not worth engaging with in a serious manner, chinkshills did this to themselves.

>>65551533
This, but unironically. The world is becoming multipolar by the actions of the orange man alone. Chinks need only to not fuck it up.

>>65551549
not implessive

>>65551533
>>65551541
How did you interpret anything I said as “China shilling”? Their military has spent far more time on things like ritualized border slap-fights with Indian troops than on gaining actual experience in modern warfare. They don’t have a developed NCO corps and the practical experience of their officer corps is non-existent. At this point, you could make an argument that even North Korea has better armed forces in certain respects. The broader competition with China howeve, is really about finance and energy. which country can build the stronger system and sell itself as the more attractive partner to the rest of the world.

>>65551551
I didn't interpret anything other than the blatant nature of thread that anyone can see from fucking miles away

>>65551551
samefag, Also I actually lived in China for a few years, and I found that people there can be even more consumerist than Americans. they love shitty cheap products and are always concerned with their image. They’re also quite hypocritical. Like the worst aspects of American and East Asian cultures were combined.
Also chinese women are pretty easy lays for anyone wondering.

>>65550841
It's not June anymore, they lost control of the strait.

>>65547919
It probably doesn't matter if they're good or not because the context of China's next war.

The most popular (and likley) scenario is China invading Taiwan which is a stone toss away with the two major factors that keep them from doing so is the threat of an allied intervention from SK, Japan, US, etc. As well as the collapse of the Chinese export-reliant economy.

Of all the countries listed not a single one has any experience in a conventional conflict since the gulf war/invasion of iraq not to mention a peer conflict which was ironically the Korean war. (Which under supplied and underarmed chinese grunts forced into a stalemate)

China has more than enough munitions to literally flatten Taiwan and enough range to keep ships away which MAY give them enough time to take the island before allies can intervene.

However, there are rumors of Chinese training being unrealistic and heavily propagandized (blu-for not being allowed to lose against op-for during exercises). As well as the heavy amounts of corruption that is inferred my Xi's recent leadership purges. Not to mention rumors of China's rocket force replacing fuel with water.

All things considered, it's extremely speculative, especially given how China's tends to under report it's systemic flaws.

>>65551808
>allied intervention of two militarily insignificant countries well within ballistic missiles' reach, and another one a whole ocean away
Quite literally never happening

>>65551808
I think that if China were to launch a military operation, it would likely be somewhere in Southeast Asia, specifically Myanmar. It would be something China would be forced to do because its financial assets or other resources are being seized by rebel factions. China might publicly justify the operation as being necessary to protect civilians, but the real motivation would be the protection of financial interests and the recovery of assets or equipment seized by those factions.

>>65551826
>Quite literally never happening
Maybe, but is China willing to play a game of Chicken with WW3?

File: 1731101127221156.jpg (50 KB, 686x386)

50 KB JPG

>>65551808
>peer conflict
This is how I know I can disregard an entire post:
1. The term peer is wildly subjective
2. It assumes China is a peer (it is not)
3. It completely discredits American military advances and accomplishments

Additionally, you cite the lack of "peer conflict" experience among Taiwan's allies as a weakness- but do not do the same for China herself (who has much MUCH less conflict experience by comparison).

>>65551832
Yes, mostly because they're playing with Norks in their backyard. Also WW3 over Taiwan is silly considering the US doesn't even recognize it to begin with.

>>65551830
Considering China's doctrine of economical belt-and-road initiatives rather than military intervention in Africa, it probably wont intervene over financial interests.

Maybe it would in the same fashion it tried to invade Vietnam to protect the Khmer Rouge, but that motivation was far more ideological than economical.

>>65551837
>It completely discredits American military advances and accomplishments
The strait is still closed after 6 months so I'd say the US would lose

>>65547919
Aging Americans try not to replay the Japanese role in WW2 challenge [impossible]
-our treaties will beat them!
-our strategy will beat them!
-our tactics will beat them!
-our industry can beat them!
-our wunderwaffen will beat them!
-our martial spirit will beat them! <<<<<you are here
-uwu the weak mercantile industrial nation 20x our size was actually so strong and based all along! if only we weren't driven into this unnecessary war by Jewish magnates! [coming soon?]

>>65551837
>The term peer is wildly subjective
Fair, lets say in this context its the closest in military power to X country.

>It assumes China is a peer (it is not)
Then who is a peer to the USA? Nobody?

>It completely discredits American military advances and accomplishments
And what advances would those be? Its not like the USA has a literally "I win" wunderwaffe. The inverse of this statement is true too, China has radically developed it's military since Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms.

File: 1781273496726139.gif (246 KB, 352x200)

246 KB GIF

>>65551860
>Then who is a peer to the USA? Nobody?
Pretty much
>And what advances would those be?
Stealth bombers, missile interceptors, integrated data collection and parsing
The inverse of this statement is true too, China has radically developed it's military since Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms.
Yeah, if you take China's word for it, which is incredibly fucking dubious as you already pointed out. Until I see China intercept missiles, aircraft, perform SEAD, hit a target with a ballistic missile, etc; I won't believe shit.

I see we've already stalled out and just gone full tilt into "america bad and dying empire" posting- hence why nobody gives these threads an ounce of credibility.

Unimplessive

>>65551911
>>65551848
You two are honestly just two sides of the same mindset, LARPing and living out masturbatory fantasies of violence. A US/China war would be stupid and could devastate both nations and the wider world, not necessarily through nuclear war, but through the enormous damage it would inflict on the global economy.
The US/China conflict that does exist is primarily a struggle over influence in Asia. Why can’t you morons understand that? There are no material interests that would make an actual war a rational outcome.

File: yemen.png (213 KB, 475x930)

213 KB PNG

>>65551837
>It completely discredits American military advances and accomplishments
Are these accomplishments in the room with us right now?

>>65551960
And before anyone accuses me of being a china shill. as I said before, I regard the Chinese as a superficial, materialistic and frankly effeminate people, I do not exactly have much sympathy for them.

>>65551960
>There are no material interests that would make an actual war a rational outcome.
We are 4 years plus into Russia willing burning their nation down and you still think this is a valid argument?
Xi is gonna do the funny and ensure China is sent back to the warlord era.

>>65551966
>abduct a state leader overnight with impunity
>annihilate entire militaries, navies and airforces across the planet with almost no notice
>barely suffer casualties or losses while removing entire nations from the playing board

File: status.png (111 KB, 1281x827)

111 KB PNG

Yeah you fucking killed Osama and Saddam too. Did it matter in the long run?

>>65551976
That quite literally proves my point. Russia and Ukraine are bordering nations and the continental context of Europe is paramount to understanding both how decisions are made and what decisions can be made, from trade to war. The context between China and the US by contrast is the fucking Pacific Ocean.

>>65552007
None of what you wrote has any relevance to my post or your previous one. Please stop coping that foreign dictators are petty, emotional, retards and not rational actors.

File: chyna.png (109 KB, 1452x816)

109 KB PNG

>>65551911

>"america bad and dying empire"
You're strawmanning me as I don't really fall into that camp, I've argued with CCP-pilled Chinks before and the arguments usually involve baseless points about how China is objectively better in every metric.

But my point isn't that China has a better or a 1:1 military to the USA. My point is that there is a significant enough chance that it poses a very real threat in invading Taiwan.

>Yeah, if you take China's word for it, which is incredibly fucking dubious
Ok fair, but it doesn't immediately disprove that China's military has made significant advances. China was able to drive the entire UN back to the 38th parallel with poor logistics and lack of firepower, so lets not underestimate them, especially if they are at least more comparable to the US military than they were before.

But I'm also very doubtful that China will ever invade, the fact that Xi hasn't jumped the gun and invaded Taiwan yet (despite it's aggressive posturing) can infer how CCP leadership is either doubtful of the actual success of the invasion, and/or fearful of the wider consequences of the war.

>>65552038
>Please stop coping that foreign dictators are petty, emotional, retards and not rational actors.
I 100% agree with this view. They aren’t rational actors, but the decisions they can realistically make are constrained by material factors. Two guys who hate each other living in the same neighborhood are much more likely to end up in a shootout, whereas two guys who hate each other but do business together and live in different towns have a very different reality.

>>65551844
>belt and road
is a scam to debt trap idiots that fall, or get bribed, for it. Everything changs make is the embodiment of a potemkins village. Retard

File: fromchinawithlove.jpg (91 KB, 992x558)

91 KB JPG

>>65551960
economic "collapse" is overrated as fuck. Pidors are getting half their refineries blown up, which is their only revenue source of significance , yet they are still a ways off from going completely bankrupt. They have not even degenerated into the stalinism route which is the natural next evolution stage for putinism
>massive network of slave labor concentration camps
>massive terror waves to fill said concentration camps with slaves and keep the rest of the serfs fearful and paranoid

US will be fine in full blown total war and even changland. As they are energy and food deficient right now theoretically, but the largely undefended siberia is right up north. Of which they can extract what they need energy wise. Also central asia is largely chang aligned now that muscovia is in a terminal decline and they have enough agricultural potential.

main thing stopping this theoretical war from ever realistically happening is not some joke like economy doomerism, but simple morale. US is demoralized and pretty much wasted all of its political will to fight post cold war on fucking zuttslims in the middle east. Now the reaction is isolationism, of which the first twitter populist POTUS trump is clearly indicating. But he is not alone and other politicals are following with this strong electoral sentiment

>>65552124
The Ruskies have been under sanctions, on and off, for decades. Their economy was already deeply entrenched and relatively insulated, which made it easier for them to adjust. By contrast the US and Chinese economies are vastly more interconnected and much more vulnerable to disruptions.
>main thing stopping this theoretical war from ever realistically happening is not some joke like economy doomerism, but simple morale. US is demoralized and pretty much wasted all of its political will to fight post cold war on fucking zuttslims in the middle east. Now the reaction is isolationism, of which the first twitter populist POTUS trump is clearly indicating. But he is not alone and other politicals are following with this strong electoral sentiment
I genuinely don’t understand this fetishistic obsession with going to war with China. Like, what’s actually the deal here?

>>65547919
that plane would look so much better without the front canards
just make the wings a little bit larger

>>65552053
You're acting like Taiwan doesn't exist and that oceans limit US force projection. Are you pretending to be retarded?

>>65552151
I know more than you do. China is already waging a campaign against Taiwan, through poison rather then shooting them. It’s funding pro-unification groups, supporting politicians, criminal networks and indigenous separatist movements and pushing to remove restrictions on mainland Chinese investment in Taiwanese corporations. The politicians promoting these policies are effectively serving a broader strategy of economic penetration. The goal is financial domination first and then using that leverage to force some kind of political union. This has been the basic strategy China has pursued for over a decade.

https://globaltaiwan.org/2024/01/a-preliminary-assessment-of-ccp-political-warfare-targeting-taiwans-2024-elections
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/senior-chinese-official-calls-resolutely-cracking-down-taiwan-independence-2026-02-10
https://jamestown.org/criminal-organizations-as-vectors-of-influence-in-taiwan

>>65552168
Those dreams died after Hong Kong. I see you aren't pretending.

>>65551847
>The strait is still closed
To Iran. Otherwise, not really.

>>65552186
Hong Kong was an objective success for them, though. They’re doubling down on what they did there, particularly in terms of early investment.

>>65552196
What does that have to do with Taiwan public opinion turning against reunification after the crackdown?
Christ retard can you keep on one topic without trying to pivot to something unrelated.

>>65552144
>I genuinely don’t understand this fetishistic obsession with going to war with China. Like, what’s actually the deal here?
It’s a conventional military conflict that they’ll most likely win, that’s really the point. They just want a victory in an actual war. If the world were some kind of simplistic war game, maybe that’s how it would play out. But real life is far more complicated.

>>65552200
Do you think American public opinion was the deciding factor in any of the major decisions made over the last 75+ years? If you actually looked at what China is doing instead of getting caught up in the hype around some ground Invasion, you’d see that its operation against Taiwan is fundamentally about economic domination, taking control of key industries and building influence from within. They have their own small networks of supporters, including criminal elements and bought-out politicians, working in tandem with a business class that sees an opportunity to make a few extra bucks.

>>65552211
>Do you think American public opinion was the deciding factor in any of the major decisions made over the last 75+ years?
Yes. Obviously. The US govt cannot simply ignore public outrage or just commit mass murder in the streets like some tinpot dictatorship. This has been proven enough times that you'd have to be a hollowed out shell of delusional paranoia not to fucking acknowledge it

>>65552211
>Do you think American public opinion was the deciding factor in any of the major decisions made over the last 75+ years?
Yes, Vietnam off the top of my head retard.
If China is taking over through economic means why did they invest 70% less in 2025 than in 2024?

>>65552216
>>65552221
I'm talking about more covert decisions, such as the current state of the West with regard to immigration or the right to die, where the overwhelming majority of the population is opposed if these issues were put directly to a vote. But they aren't put to a vote. all you can vote for is a representative within the governmental system. That built-in governmental apathy is what China is relying on when it comes to Taiwan, gradually buying up Taiwanese companies and assets through investment rather than pursuing direct control.
>If China is taking over through economic means why did they invest 70% less in 2025 than in 2024?
The trade war between the US and China heightened concerns among Taiwanese manufacturers and US officials regarding the use of China as a production base for exports to the United States, prompting many companies to diversify their supply chains and invest elsewhere. This contributed to the decline in Taiwanese investment in mainland China, which fell by nearly 59% in 2025. This led to Beijing to implement economic and political measures against specific Taiwanese companies, further increasing uncertainty for Taiwanese enterprises operating in China.

File: chinese meal.png (1.03 MB, 1028x566)

1.03 MB PNG

>>65551848
>the weak mercantile industrial nation 20x our size
Yeah about that.

>A Forensic Examination of China’s National Accounts
PDF: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ChenEtAl_web.pdf

>How Much Should We Trust the Dictator’s GDP Estimates?
PDF: https://ostromworkshop.indiana.edu/pdf/piep2018/martinez-paper.pdf

>How Stable Is China’s Growth? Shedding Light on Sparse Data
PDF: https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/epr/2020/epr_2020_china-lights_clark.pdf

>China’s Growth and Productivity Performance Debate Revisited
PDF:https://www.conference-board.org/pdf_free/workingpapers/EPWP1401.pdf

Context for the methodology used:
>Measuring Economic Growth from Outer Space
PDF: https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.102.2.994

>China, Open-Source Information, and Transparency
PDF: https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2020-08/BG3516.pdf


https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Caixin/Lights-go-on-but-no-one-goes-to-work
https://www.caixinglobal.com/2020-03-04/lights-are-on-but-no-ones-working-how-local-governments-are-faking-coronavirus-recovery-101524058.html
https://archive.vn/ePuWx

The US has around twice the total industrial output of China, with Germany and Japan having nearly as much as China does. "How can that be?" my strawman of you says rhetorically. Glad you asked.

China counts "industrial processes" differently than the rest of the world which have mostly compatible definitions of "industrial". China however counts numerous service jobs like maintenance and repair of basically anything as "industrial", it also counts the construction industry(which constitutes 30% of gdp) and its supporting professions as industrial. And though cement manufacture is indeed an industrial process it makes up a full third of the remainder, and guess where it goes, into construction again.

>>65552438
[continued]
China inflates nearly all its statistics so this isn't a surprise. China does take the components and refined materials sent to it and finish the products, but that isn't the most difficult part of manufacturing. Indeed it is the one most easily replaced. China gets by through abuse of laws and the good will of the jews in the west who allowed them to abuse the laws and gave them the opportunity in the first place. And yes it was jews, for example they deliberately took over US Steel and tanked it to give China a leg up. Now however like a fool Xi has stopped playing the Jews in an actual long game to acquire more and more shit while keeping their cultural and political influence at arm's length. He's gone full Mao and wants total autocracy. This is oddly enough like the Japs not realizing that the "economic miracle" was the due to preferential treatment, getting too big for their britches and losing that treatment all at once. But China has also managed to piss off every neighbors who matters as well has over half of its client states.

>>65552221
>Yes, Vietnam off the top of my head retard.
Really? There were countless violent protests about our role in Vietnam going all the way back to 1945, with a lot of violence throughout the 60s, but they peter out in the early 70s and we didn't leave until 75. Seems to me like Vietnam was abandoned because it was a pointless quagmire, not because of any student chimpouts back home. Public opinion ending it is just some modern mythology.

>>65552299
>I'm talking about more covert decisions, such as the current state of the West with regard to immigration
Leaving aside that's not what you initially wrote and are now backpedaling, the answer would still be yes. Why do you think they put out so much pro-brownoid propaganda if public opinion doesn't matter.
>The trade war between the US and China heightened concerns among Taiwanese manufacturers and US officials regarding the use of China as a production base for exports to the United States, prompting many companies to diversify their supply chains and invest elsewhere. This contributed to the decline in Taiwanese investment in mainland China, which fell by nearly 59% in 2025. This led to Beijing to implement economic and political measures against specific Taiwanese companies, further increasing uncertainty for Taiwanese enterprises operating in China.
So Taiwan cut its investments in China to side with the US so China did the same back to punish them. Did Taiwan reinvest after China cut their own investments? Because if they haven't you are not helping your argument here.

>>65547919
Alternatively:
Is America basically WWII Japan at this point?
>small shipbuilding capacity
>navy strained by commitments all over
>reliant on imported strategic resources by sea

This is exactly what Japan faced and they kept believing in their superiority until the nukes dropped and the soviets took Manchuria.

Meanwhile China is America in WWII:
>massive manufacturing/shipbuilding capacity
>massive strategic reserves
>a gazillion skilled workers able to replace any and all destroyed equipment at a higher rate

You don't need to have a monopoly on the 99th percentile engineers if you have 1000x the 90th percentile engineers than your adversaries.

>>65552694
No see
>>65552438
>>65552440
The US shipbuilding capacity basically lies fallow since WW2 and indeed was lying fallow when WW2 started and required a massive overhaul to get up to speed. Likewise the difference between manufacturing a commercial hull and a military is so great that you don't save as much effort as you might think vs just building new capacity, that was true in 1940 and is even more true today. Births do help but the US has tons of those, what it doesn't have is active shipbuilders. That said given the shit nature of chink building you could basically conscript below average white men to do the job and get similar results.

China does have a lot of drone production, albeit not of military grade. But given the lackluster performance of Iranian drones of similar quality against a US expeditionary force I wouldn't expect much. Japan was also starting out with a smaller fleet and its kantai kessen required the US to be retarded and cooperate and commit to engagements in Japan's favor several times to even the odds.

Right now China has to take Taiwan and frankly take it fast and most intact. The US just needs to make them bleed. Given that China has maybe 3 modern SSNs if we are being generous to the latest Shang class boats vs the 50 equivalent or better(most likely vastly superior) US boats.

It's more like the US of 1870 vs the Royal Navy. Yes the US technically has a fuckton of ironclads but they aren't useful for projecting power. It would restrict RN activity just like how Chink missiles, frigates, and conventional subs could today. But it cannot dictate the engagement outside of deciding when and how to bum rush Taiwan.

The weakness of the US isn't that of Japan circa 1940. The "weakness" of the US is the fact that at any given time it is 6 months away from a genocidal race war. Of course provoking that would be retarded for the enemies of the US. The US is weak because it is a libtard power rather than a white nationalist state.

>>65551529
War is mostly stupid and expensive. Look at the money the US has spent on war in the last 20yrs, over 4 trillion dollars and still counting, and for what? Marginal gains in the middle east? Maybe prevented a terrorist attack? Imagine where the US would be if they spend 4 trillion dollars on infrastructure. Russia is fucking retarded for starting the Ukraine war as well. If China just doesn't do a stupid pointless expensive war they will likely end up on top, but I a feeling they will fuck up and start a stupid expensive war.

>>65552718
>that at any given time it is 6 months away from a genocidal race war
is this what retarded foreigners really believe?

>>65552957
>Look at the money the US has spent on war in the last 20yrs, over 4 trillion dollars and still counting, and for what
Wars which are not wars of genocidal conquest are expensive wastes of time, everybody knows this. The problem isn't war itself but the current political system which dominates the world. And the point of the last few wars was to benefit Israel not the United States, and though they didn't turn out perfectly they did achieve those ends by eliminating any potential of a pan-Arabist movement against said state.

>>65553015
>they did achieve those ends by eliminating any potential of a pan-Arabist movement against said state.
Please proofread your clanker, if you let it embarrass itself like this you're liable for neglect

>>65552047
>>65547919
China's military is in no position to assault Taiwan. If you assume the worst possible case scenario for Taiwan's geopolitics, that no allied help comes and they are completely blockaded, even in these circumstances it's unlikely that China would actually be able to capture the island, let alone hold it.

China's military has deep-rooted problems which are easily overlooked because they are unique. First and foremost, the officer corps was never in a good state (combat units still generally being led by quasi-political officers) and has gotten worse under Xi, who has repeatedly purged it to such an extent that the entire upper echelon is deliberately full of timid incompetents. This is paired with small unit equipment and tactics that are shockingly poor. Some of you may know that China does not use LMGs at the squad level (or even platoon level iirc) and instead replaces them with extra grenadiers. This is completely retarded and is even worse with the evolving drone meta. But you probably don't know that not all Chinese infantry have body armor even in 2026, and that many of those that do have been sourced Alibaba mystery meat "plates"; Chinese SF have been seen to use Western-made plates. You might also not know that the QBZ-95 is still in widespread use, despite being a total piece of shit. Basically, there are no signs that, at the small unit level, any portion of the PLA is combat effective.

This of course compounds with the total and complete lack of any combat experience whatsoever, which other anons have discussed ITT. There is zero institutional knowledge. Your average US airsoft field has more genuine combat experience than the entire PLA combined.

But that's really just the tip of the iceberg. "So what if their infantry is shit, land millions of em and Taiwan will be overwhelmed!" - Even if that were correct, how exactly are you going to land millions of chinks in an amphibious assault? China doesn't know either.

1/?

>>65553046
Again this is one of those things people on this board (rightly) laugh about on the regular. The actual unironic Chinese plan is to commandeer a shitton of fishing boats and use these to ferry their troops to Taiwan. This is an absurd strategy for several reasons
>1. The losses incurred during such an assault before even reaching the shores would make Russian losses look like a fucking joke.
>2. Actually commandeering, accumulating, and preparing these vessels for troop transport would take time and be extremely visible. It inherently gives Taiwan weeks if not months to prepare for imminent invasion.
>3. There is virtually no way to protect these vessels during the aforementioned preparatory phase. Taiwan could and would sink many of them in port.
>4. Attempting to overwhelm the defenders via sheer volume of troop transports would compound the problem of Taiwan's landing geography.
Taiwan is naturally one of the most defensible places on Earth. Most of the island's coastline is completely unsuitable for landing even a small force. The western portion of the island, where viable landing sites are clustered, is both urbanized and fortified. The interior of the island, including much of Taipei and its outlying areas, is a network of steep-walled valleys and canyons that, again, have been extensively fortified. Viable landing areas are scarce, and viable paths inland are scarcer still. Now try cramming a bajillion chinkboats in there while they're under fire and hitting mines. Not great. Hell, honestly, even the US military would have a hard time trying to capture Taiwan.

Back to the PLA. The Chinese military is not the US military; it has been described as a military geared for regional power projection, but I don't even call it that. It's more of a military for show. A military that builds supercarriers but never lets them leave port, for fear of letting rust starr to show.

2/?

>>65551446
>>65551514
I had to go and do my job (which you don't have) and fuck my gf (which you also don't have) but I came back and boy howdy, you really typed all of that just to say nothing substantial whatsoever. I asked you what the strategic goals were and if the US achieved them, and what we gained, and you essentially refused to answer and spent a full page seething.

>Kinetically

Meaningless operator speak that has no bearing on what actually happens in the end and outs you as a faggot who is trying to sound cool.

>B-but we killed so much more of them
>B-but we were tactically superior
>B-but here's my metaphor about how a war involving millions is like a street fight between two guys

All arguments that don't even deserve commentary, all just fucking cope. Whatever you want to call it, whether it's politically untenable (excuse making) whether we "got tired and went home" (read: failed our objectives and retreated), or if it's "we tactically won because muh K:D" (cope) it doesn't change that we sacrificed thousands of US lives for no reason, and North Vietnam ended up in charge of Vietnam and the Taliban ended up in charge of Afghanistan despite a massive effort on our part to stop it. If you set strategic objectives that are completely unrealistic and fall short of them, you lose. If you don't gain the things from the war that you set out to gain, you lose. And if you're a top tier military and you end up out billions of dollars and thousands of troops for no reason, it doesn't matter how many casualties the other side took, you still lose.

You probably think I'm unpatriotic for saying so but the truth is you're a fucking traitor for lying, and disrespecting the thousands of American soldiers that have died by not learning from the mistakes that killed them. Vietnam was the original sin of American foreign policy and yet we still have retards like you who refused to learn from it, and in doing so you are ensuring it will happen again and again.

>>65553064
Their air force in particular is not up to the task. It simply lacks both the numbers and the technology to carry out a sustained air campaign against a competent defender. Their numbers, which are dwarfed by the US, are padded by the dozens to hundreds of ancient airframes still in active service. They only have ~300-400 in-service J-20. Their only strategic bomber is the H-6, which is the chink version of the TU-16, a plane the USSR stopped making in 1962, and which Russia decommisisoned altogether in the 90s. Aside from that, they have about 200 aging fighter-bombers, and a smattering of cheap multirole jets. Not really the kind of air force that can overwhelm Taiwan. So, what then, surface to surface missile spam? Yeah, because that worked so well in, uhh... no conflict ever?

Some chinks also seem to be under the impression that Taiwan would just roll over for them, rather than fight. The chances of that are zero, thanks to two recent events: the Hong Kong crackdown, and the invasion of Ukraine. China would be faced with a millions-strong defending force that will fight to protect their homes.

And that's just the pure force-on-force considerations. Realistically speaking, there isn't a chance in hell that China would be allowed to just do whatever. Taiwan is pivotal for the global economy now, perhaps more pivotal than the mainland. You have to be huffing some good shit to think the world is going to just accept Chinese aggression and semiconductor shortages with a shoulder shrug. Will we get a multinational alliance that stages a formal military intervention? There's a surprisingly good chance of it actually; Japan and the USA would be the core of it, but the PRC has really done an excellent job of setting the entire region against them. (Don't even start Norktard, I know you're reading this)

3/3 because I want to go to bed. Tldr chink military fucking sucks and would lose badly if they ever actually tried to take Taiwan by force

File: 1783896715803008.gif (652 KB, 1040x720)

652 KB GIF

>>65553074
>If you win the war but then geopolitics happens, you actually lost the war!
Hmm yes I agree. Alexander actually lost every war he fought because his empire fractured after his death. Israel actually lost the six day war because the Sinai was later returned to Egypt. The US actually lost the Gulf War because they had to go back and rape Saddam a second time. I can't believe I didn't see it this way before

>>65547919
I thought that was the intro of the GI Joe movie.

>>65547919
A lot of people here forget that the US had a mediocre military before WWI, and even before WWII, but the events of the time drove them to ramp everything up. And that was made possible by having the world's best industrial capacity. If the perfect scenario arises for China, then all those arguments about the US having "more combat experience" won't matter at all

>>65553098
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ah2I166f_U

>>65552211
>China is infiltrating Taiwan through criminal and slimey ways
>this will surely make the Taiwanese like them

>>65553024
No that's proper conjugation, faggot, you just read at a sixth grade level.

>>65553207
The problem is that the Chinks aren't white and likely have a mean IQ somewhere around 92 rather than their claimed mean of 102. And not only does China likely not have nearly the industrial capacity it claims because it lies with every word the US industrial expansion in WW1 occurred because it was supplying the entire Entente with war materiel for 4 years. China's current capacity isn't directed towards military products. And until WW2 the US didn't have a decent tank corps, anti-tank weapons, or half the shit it needed. In fact the only thing it did have was a premiere navy.

You don't seem to have a good grasp of the American military history and thus when try to compare it to China you have no starting point to work from.

>>65547955
The IRGC told me America keeps killing their ayatollahs so I asked how many ayatollahs they have and they said they just go to the assembly and elect a new ayatollah afterwards so I said it sounds like they're just feeding ayatollahs to AMERICA and then Hasan Piker started crying.

>>65551551
i didn't, you didn't read my post.

>>65551847
>non-sequitur
sign of low intelligence.

>>65551848
>y-you a-are l-le japan now
chinkshills still shilling this narrative are so desperate LMAO.
chinese industry relies 100% on american/european design and high value ad parts manufacturing.

>>65553749
That makes me wonder what's gonna happen to China 50 years from now. Soviet union got to where they were because of lend lease. China got to where they are now because of American investment.

>>65552694
any time someone like you tries to make simplistic oneliner historical comparisons i just stop reading, you're retarded, the situation is not even slightly comparable.

>>65553074
>starts post bragging about his totally real job and totally real girlfriend (neither of which were mentioned by anyone ITT)
this gon b gud.
>m-meaningless operator speak
actual definitions are operatorspeak? right, you need to keep everything vague so that you can insist the US le lost.
>i-i'm not actually going to argue anything b-but it's cope
i accept your concession.

sorry not every thread is a circlejerk about how clever you think you are for subverting the simple question "who would win in a fight?" with "b-but muh geopolitics"

nobody gives a fuck about geopolitics, that's not what the conversation was about, now shoo.

>>65553752
china made the smart decision to at least intergrate capitalist economics into their state, the USSR didn't do that which is why it eventually crumbled so fast.
china might decline or might not, ultimately they're still capitalist enough that they're just going to be poorer or richer, not have their entire system rugpulled out from under them because none of it worked or ever did.

>>65547955
Hey I thought it was WW2, careful Chang supervisor may take note.

>>65548086
Due brave iraqi resistance they didn't depose uncle Sadam or its allies did all the heavy lifting, anyway.

>>65551842
That's because Taiwan isn't a separate country, it's the rightful government of all China. This wouldn't be ww3, it would be an American intervention in an allied country's civil war to uphold the rule of law.

>>65551400
To be quiet frank US has the technical means to easily genocide vietnamese and afghans, a couple of dirty atomics would have done the trick, it's not done because the same conscience which creates a country everyone wants to migrate to sees the act of genocide as morally wrong.
Also maybe this is the reason why there is such desperation on China, Russia and assorted mideast organizations to make US look back here, on a US website in english?

File: 1784543479320101.jpg (65 KB, 452x635)

65 KB JPG

>>65551982
>annihilate entire militaries, navies and airforces across the planet with almost no notice

File: 1772722122123767.png (225 KB, 662x442)

225 KB PNG

>>65553809
problem?

File: 1671448515522127.jpg (229 KB, 1096x719)

229 KB JPG

>>65553816
I lol every time I remember pete hegseth ordered that sinking solely to cure his penis envy over the british having the world's only nuke sub kill

>>65553809
>America decapitated the Iranian leadership and crippled their military
>Iran can only shoot at innocent civilian ships causing economic damage to everyone including their allies
>this is somehow a terrific success for Iran
Cool

File: 1772649135999315.png (541 KB, 1007x1090)

541 KB PNG

>>65553824
in this case i share the sentiment, it got me hard

File: 1374359584472.jpg (119 KB, 299x372)

119 KB JPG

>>65553816

File: 1789389146104916.png (113 KB, 607x464)

113 KB PNG

>>65553852
>this is somehow a terrific success for Iran
Yeah, crazy how reality works

>>65553949
>reality is when i draw a red cross on the map somewhere
cool

>>65553809
so how does this passive-aggressive meme change the fact that what he said is true?
but yes, the strait is indeed closed to iran.

>>65553949
>y-yeah
except no, it isn't, lol.

File: 1671129161541735.gif (745 KB, 316x318)

745 KB GIF

>>65553968
You can't complain about passive aggressiveness and then finish with a "I know you are but what am I"

>>65553953
>>65553975
You guys keep on rocking

>>65554000
>i am totally not mad: the post
i'm not the one spamming the same phrase 24/7, only you are obsessed enough to do that.

>>65553798
Why should we want the scum of the world coming here to extract gibs? Why shouldn't we just exterminate the entire horde and nip these problems in the bud? Also we'd probably use nerve agents, smash all the vital infrastructure, and drop agent orange on all the fields. Starvation and disease are more effective than nukes, and nerve gas is better at clearing out population centers on a per dollar basis.