9 ms·

As a non-american, it's always interesting to see the point of view of the major military power. Why is China "America's top adversary"? Aside from the OPSEC i

• yborg 5y ago
  Everyone is an expert on the Internet, this is some guy's opinion, not a statement of official US government policy. Also makes it sound more dramatic, especially with the Air Force General "looking impressed" hot take. The fact of the matter is that it would be a bigger problem if a top secret aircraft was sitting outside exposed to the sky in full daylight in the first place, where Gen. Kelly's and presumably everyone else's surveillance satellites could count the rivets on the thing.
  • Frost1x 5y ago
    You know they do have to fly these things for real testing. Only so much can be simulated with computers and wind tunnels. It's not a matter if it's exposed, it's a matter of when and where it's exposed. Security through obscurity is very much still a legitimate thing for a lot of aspects. We're not quite to a point yet where you have continuous ultra high resolution satellite imagery of the ground where you could feasibly record these things and eventually find them. Chances are you just don't have the data unless you know all the places to look. In the not too far off future it might be a bit more difficult. We're getting closer to that point for sure given export controls on AI software used in geospatial imagery analysis: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/06/2019-27649/addition-of-software-specially-designed-to-automate-the-analysis-of-geospatial-imagery-to-the-export https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/06/2019-27... Part of this I suspect is geared at stifling an adversary from utilizing lower resolution imagery data to identify targets of interest to point higher resolution imagery or other sensors and agents at to collect intel.
    • kbenson 5y ago
      Well, there's a slight difference between "flying these things for real testing" and being carted around on a flatbed where yahoos with a smartphones are around to take videos and post them. Presumably, if it actually requires some level of security clearance, either it should have been covered for transport, or the yahoos with smartphones should have been cleared of the area to at least reduce the chance of something silly like this. Not a whole lot you can do if you need to fly it and it's going to be in or around public areas, nor much you can do about satellite imagery, but that doesn't mean ignore all opsec.
      • TedDoesntTalk 5y ago
        It might be a fake or a plant, with the "leaked video" a disinformation tactic.
      • weq 5y ago
        exactly. contractors or not gotta checkin there phones before entering places where anything top secret may be. if this was real heads would roll you would expect.
• ethbr0 5y ago
  Because of this chart: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures#/media/File%3AMilitary_Expenditures_by_Country_2019.svg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_militar... And because China (as far as I know?) is the only country threatening to invade a US ally (Taiwan).
  • ethbr0 5y ago
    Oh! Duh. North Korea would be on that list too.
• bhawks 5y ago
  China routine threatens US allies with military, even nuclear action. If the US military did not consider China a potential adversary it is not doing its job. Threatening nuclear attack on Japan https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202107/1228036.shtml https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202107/1228036.shtml Border standoff with India https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192872.shtml https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192872.shtml Threatening Australia with nukes https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202109/1234460.shtml https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202109/1234460.shtml
  • tcmart14 5y ago
    To be fair, I deployed on US Navy ships twice. It is better to think of it as fking with eachother. We tail them for a week or two, they tail us. Russians fly an aircraft over us, we do it over them. I think it is more about showing off than actually threatening. Media only presents this when Russians or Chinese approach us, but not the other way around.
    • hypertele-Xii 5y ago
      It's literally tribal territorial rattling. All social animals "play fight" to determine who's stronger and thus "entitled" to the best resources.
  • jackpirate 5y ago
    Your link claiming China is threatening a nuclear attack on Japan doesn't even mention nuclear weapons, directly or indirectly. China has a "no first use" policy on it's nuclear weapons, and therefore has publicly committed not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear state like Japan. (The US, in contrast, has a policy of allowing first-use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states.) For details on China's policy, you can see e.g.: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2018.1458415 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2018.1...
    • bhawks 5y ago
      I purposefully used the Global Times (CCP state run news source) for all those links - it is interesting reading what they directly want the world to read. Anyway the original message was much more colorful. This video from Chinese military channel https://youtu.be/7vKf5SXnsHA https://youtu.be/7vKf5SXnsHA Yes they pulled it after 2 million views. The Japanese exception to no first use message was delivered pretty clearly though. When was the last time PBS or NPR called for expanding nuclear capabilities 10x? In China it was last year. https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1187766.shtml https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1187766.shtml CCPs no-first-use is just window dressing on the MAD status quo of the world. Perhaps it makes them think they look moral? Their cavalier way of discussing it is disgusting.
• wahern 5y ago
  I can't speak for the author or to popular anti-China narratives in the U.S., but from a traditional geopolitical perspective China poses a threat because of territorial claims independent of Taiwan, most importantly its claims over the South China Sea. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_South_China_Sea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_So... Those claims pose a grave threat directly to global shipping and to regional fishing and mining rights, and indirectly to the largely peaceful maritime waters status quo globally. Over the past decade China has also been making increasingly brazen land grabs along and near the Indian border. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_border_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_border_dispute and, most recently, https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/05/07/china-bhutan-border-villages-security-forces/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/05/07/china-bhutan-border-vil... Relative to the South China Sea that's slightly less of a concern geopolitically (ignoring the potential for another full blown war between India and China), but does evidence China's actual (not simply rhetorical) aggression. Finally, North Korea is a protected state of China. The only reason North Korea has nuclear weapons is because China prevents military and, to a lesser degree, economic retaliation. China permitting North Korea to develop and possess nuclear weapons is a violation of China's role as a nuclear super power, especially in light of the proliferation risk North Korea poses. By contrast, the U.S. killed Taiwan's nuclear program the moment it was discovered, and strongly opposed both the Israeli and Pakistani programs up until they were already an accomplished fact. (Note that the U.S. had far more leverage with Taiwan--it could threaten to retract its defense umbrella, which would have passively permitted immediate Chinese invasion--whereas with Israel and Pakistan the only viable options would have required direct retaliation.) Foreign policy and military analysts in the U.S. and, I would assume, China understand that the global economic tussle between the U.S. and China are distinct from the geopolitical security issues. (Strongly related, of course, but the calculus nonetheless significantly different.) The masses and certain political factions in each country don't tend to draw such distinctions, though.
  • publicola1990 5y ago
    But is China really threating the US directly in anyway through military confrontation? Taiwan, China sea matters are localised to the close neighborhood of China. Does the US desire peaceful coexistence with China or not? Reading some of the hawkish, cold war style jingoism coming out of US media makes one wonder?
• hourislate 5y ago
  I am under the impression you are not familiar with the HAN culture? It doesn't allow for sharing or 2nd place, it's a winner take all and destroy everyone else. The China of today is determined to rule the world and I mean the entire world.
• jdavis703 5y ago
  Military power is roughly equivalent to GDP. Is there any other country that can come close to matching the power of a Chinese economy on war footing? And other countries, especially those with any sort of rivalry that could turn into a war should be wary of the USA.
• chrischen 5y ago
  China is America's enemy because they are achieving rival status and America can't just walk all over China like they do most South and Central American countries, its allies, etc. The bad stuff China does is just frosting on top for the narrative.
  • weq 5y ago
    They are allies because they have common enermies. War and ideaology is mans worst attributes and will only lead to the cultures downfall. That is why humans are stuck in a cycle of repeating mistakes from the past. Blinded by there own ego. In a constant battle of picking sides, where winners reinforce positions, rewrite history and loosers are always waiting to take the crown back at the slightest slip up. Like that will be the final staw, like they will be last king to end all kings. Unfortunately for the US, China has used its own tactics against it. through the greed of capitalism it has lost grip of its influence and let its competitive advantage be exported. When push comes to shove, i would rather be taking a blue pill for virility then then eating a tiger penis. The US detains only the illegals in there own countries, while China simply invades, moves in and purifies. The US gives lethal injections, while China sends you to concentration camps then sells your body parts highest bidder. The lesser of two evils in this case is clearly the country with more diversity and acceptance for other points of view. No way a black person would ever be considered pure enough to lead China. China out-racists the US on every measure, as it does in systemic corruption. No communist has ever lived in its final utopia. Just as no captialist ever has. Or ever will. After a certain point, every culture that defines itself on war will fade. And thats that.
  • specialist 5y ago
    Agree with "rival status". Two belligerents wrestling over which currency the world economy will use. The history of humanity in a nutshell. Lather, rinse, repeat.
• disgu 5y ago
  It's because China is on its way to take the top spot economically while also being powerful enough militarily so that it cannot be touched by the US. The US is trying its best to drag out #1 for as long as possible because much of the US' influence depends on it.
• lithos 5y ago
  Just need to ask yourself who costs the wealthy the most income if they stop playing ball. At one point it was the Middle East with oil supply cutoffs. Now it’s China with supply chain manipulation and market competition.
• HWR_14 5y ago
  > Why is China "America's top adversary"? Because, leaving the US aside, China spends more on it's military than the next five largest countries combined (3/5 of which are US allies). Meanwhile, China seems to be aggressively staking claims in the South China Sea (which is important for the US and it's Asian allies) and there's a perpetual risk of war over Taiwan. China is also growing it's influence in places like Africa and Afghanistan, as well as using Belt and Road money to intermesh themselves anywhere you can. Maybe "rival" or "top potential adversary" would be a better phrase. But the idea is that there is a western block and a Chinese block (and a Russian block) exerting power on the world, and that's zero sum. It's not violent, but the competition is still there. > How should other countries consider America, then? Whatever else you think of America, with it gone or taking a step back from world affairs, there's a power vacuum that China and Russia will fill. At worst, they should think of it as the lesser evil. I would go further than that and call America good, but that seems offtopic at this point.
• rubyfan 5y ago
  Right, the narrative could alternatively read “America’s top trade partner” just as well.