>Cannot make EUV machines>Cannot make reusable rockets>Cannot make nuclear aircraft carriers>Cannot make 2nm semiconductors>Cannot even make ballpoint pensWhy are the chinese so bad at technology? Why does the world try to make China seem like a tech powerhouse? Like what Zeihan says, technology wise they're still basically India/Mexico brown shithole level, completely unable to innovate or to develop advanced technology.
>>17013856The US can't make any semiconductors worth speaking about. Taiwan couldn't make theirs without all the supporting European and Asian companies. If China achieves semiconductor autarky, it's over. Why should they make reusable rockets when currently there is no real incentive for frequent space missions? Who needs aircraft carriers when your nukes travel at the speed of light? Also why make ballpoint pens when the slave states make them for you?
>>17013856>Like what Zeihan says, technology wise they're still basically India/Mexico brown shithole level, completely unable to innovate or to develop advanced technology.Lmao you take Zeihan slop seriously?
>Cannot make EUV machines>Cannot make reusable rocketsFirst was a German one in the '60ths>Cannot make nuclear aircraft carriersNot everyone is a subhuman worshipping Baal>Cannot make 2nm semiconductorsThe term "2 nanometer", or alternatively "20 angstrom" (a term used by Intel), has no relation to any actual physical featurehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_nm_process>Cannot even make ballpoint penshttps://de.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale-ballpoint.html
I am bot, hear me roar.
>>17013856the first Chinese reusable rocket is launching tomorrow
>>17013856wanna know where ball pens were patented? in Argentina.the US imports brains by offering them tons of money. the chinese only started doing that recenrly. they are billions of people... guess where things are headed.also, zeihan literally gets "his" takes from mainstream media. you are fucking brainwashed and retarded if you take that shit seriously.
incredible timing, I have to believe OP is a troll, and a confident one
>>17013856Has this clown been right about anything intentionally?
>>17013902>guess where things are headedscientific and technological progress doesn't scale linearly with population
Would they even benefit from nuclear aircraft carriers? That's an enormous investment (of increasingly questionable efficacy in a world where missiles and drones are getting ever faster, more accurate and longer ranged without countermeasures improving to match) and it's only something you need if you intent to project military power to the other side of the world for one stupid reason or another. China does not want to play America's game of world police
>>17014010Carriers are important and China is building them at a pace never seen before by any other countryChina got the EMALS catapult on the Fujian carrier operational while the Gerald R Ford still can't launch F-35s off hers
>>17013856china's just a potemkin tiger
You know who isn't having a rough time?
>>17014012China is building one carrier every 5 years. Same rate as the US. Although, the US also retires one carrier every 5 years.>>17014010>China does not want to play America's game of world policeChina needs trade, China needs to import certain raw materials, China has overseas investments, hence China needs the ability to conduct gunboat diplomacy and the ability to counter American gunboat diplomacy
>>17014242theres been a decent amount of anti china/pro india propaganda for some reason
>peter repeats "china can't may ballpoint pens" line from the early 90s
>>17014262>China must do things the same way the Brits and later the Americans did things because, well, it's the only way things can ever work!Your thinking is amazingly limited.
>>17014323because the epstein class wants india to replace china as the worlds biggest factory. it's that simple and obvious.
>>17014262>China needs the ability to conduct gunboat diplomacy and the ability to counter American gunboat diplomacyDoesn't need to do that. The American military and navy is the most bloated, inefficient, massively polluting and epitome of human grifting. If China manages to not end up im their own version of that mess they'll do well.
>>17014002>scientific and technological progress doesn't scale linearly with populationIt does exponentially. Eastern Asia has a pretty well built research and training pipeline.
>>17014262Their Navy is all in on Destroyers which is the ideal platform for modern war (shoot fuckloads of missiles and have fuckloads of interceptors, big superstructure for giant radar panels). The type 55 is such a sexo bote. Their carriers are really just experimental platforms to see what works and what doesn't since they don't have much experience with them, I wouldn't be surprised if they stop producing them altogether. Chinaman doesn't fall for the sunk cost fallacy and after watching how useless carriers have been in Iran I'm sure there are a lot of pointed questions being asked in the chinese pentagon about whether the carrier is even a viable military platform going forward into the future. Realistically what a carrier looks like in the future is a much, much smaller vessel the size of a marine assault craft that solely launches small-medium drones.
>>17013859>If China achieves semiconductor autarky, it's overIt's not over. There's still the First Island Chain
>>17015116Various types of drone launch and recovery ships are likely to tried out. Yes, for most tasks, carriers are effectively obsolete. Doubt the US stops using them until one or two of them get sunk.
>>17013856>listening to zeihan unironicallyHow old are you?
>>17013856>>Cannot even make ballpoint pens
>>17015145Nothing projects force more than a carrier strike group
>>17015464Same thing said about battleships until that was proven false via death.
>>17015145>carriers are effectively obsoletethey are neither effectively or in any other way obsolete, this is more thirdie drivel by people who are angry that white people keep dunking on them militarily and no "dreadnought moment" has magically appeared to suddenly give them an upper hand, no matter how much they try to wish it into existence.>>17015547and this isn't happening with carriers because they're not obsolete, sorry thirdie who doesn't have an aircraft carrier.
>>17015180he is a falseflagging chinkshill lmao, a passive-aggressive one at that.
>>17015648>It's not happening because it's not happening and that's because it's not happeningThis is /sci/ not /b/. Put in some effort or don't post.
