4 ms·

It’s been quite a few years since anything US-military related didn’t also bring up thoughts and questions about the Chinese military for me as well. The gap b

by gxs 3y ago

It’s been quite a few years since anything US-military related didn’t also bring up thoughts and questions about the Chinese military for me as well. The gap between the two has closed so much within the last decade, people just do some hand waving to dismiss china because it gives them some sort of psychological comfort. In this case for example it’s the cost - sure the US spends billions more on defense, but the gap in spending is way, way smaller than people think. It’s not just a matter of ppp or anything like that, which of course plays a big part, but also just the stage in maturity these organizations are in. Not even sure what my point here, maybe I was just made uneasy by the person throwing a congratulations out there as if this were some sort of big accomplishment. The Chinese are making bigger strides day-to-day and I don’t see them celebrating.

kjkjadksj 3y ago
The US has its strenths in being an omnipresense. Not only does it have the largest carrier fleet it has bases around the world. It can mobilize anywhere on earth. China can’t do the same. They don’t have much of a navy nor do they have a global network of military bases and supply caches.
- panarchy 3y ago
  Well the belt& road initiative is probably trying to take care of that.
  - jauntywundrkind 3y ago
    It was! But it's left a lot of nations with huge debt for projects that often haven't really helped their economies. Even when things are working mind of ok, rather than build alliances and friends (build soft power), China too often acts entitled after coming in to a place & blows the political gains they should have been making. Even when coming with a carrot to the world, China's demands-of-ego get in their own way. China does have an incredibly fast growing navy. Their military is cranking out enormous amounts of everything, at a dizzying unimaginable pace. And perhaps the Belt & Road will help that nation project power some, will serve as ports and bases. But I'm not sure. I'm not sure why they are so aggressively building their military.
    - maxglute 3y ago
      PLA spending is ~2% of GDP, what US wants NATO to spend. It's just 2% of 20T economy with huge industrial capacity and relatively efficient procurement buys a lot. And since most of the hardware is new and not replacing deprecated equipment, the number naturally increase until level will production and replacement demands balances out. Ultimately PRC is ~25% larger than US by PPP, domestic MIC is largely indigenous on operate on domestic pricing, it would be weird if they don't have comparable or larger sized fleet. Much of it is also reorganization/rebalancing away from army to navy/airforce, net personel is down, but capital equipement up. It's easier for satellites/media to report 100s of more ships and planes, but not 250,000 less soldiers.
  - kjkjadksj 3y ago
    Belt and road does not make military bases much less site armed forces personnel or nuclear ordinance around the world.
    - panarchy 3y ago
      Well yeah the project is in its infancy. America doesn't just plop down military bases in places either. They build influence first. Then maybe down the line it's "we'll forgive your debt if you let us build this port for our navy" or "we'll build you a nice airport and allow you access to it if you let us use it for military purposes"
      - kjkjadksj 3y ago
        US military also paid for the political hit of stationing these warheads decades ago. It would be hard to imagine another country doing the same without triggering something like the cuban missile crisis.
- gxs 3y ago
  This is a common response but it seems to be one of those things that is just repeated over and over that in the end doesn’t even shed light into why china is a problem. And this is what I meant as well, people like being dismissive because it makes them feel better. Yes, the US has a global presence but it’s because it has to have one, china does not. The US doesn’t care about Taiwan just out of principle, it cares about Taiwan because in a way it’s fighting to keep all of Asia from falling under Chinese influence. China doesn’t have to worry about parking aircraft carriers off the coast of California at a moments notice because it doesn’t have to, what’s at stake is in their backyard where they are more than well prepared for combat. Also, the US has to spend resources projecting power in Europe for many reasons, which only makes it more vulnerable to a conflict with China. Can you imagine what would happen if russia decided to go to war in Europe with full aid from China while the US was also trying to fight an all out war in Asia? These aren’t some doomsday scenarios I’m coming up with here, just stating that dismissing China the way Americans do is reminiscent of the same hubris that has come to bite other nations in the ass sooner or later.

by gxs 3y ago

kjkjadksj 3y ago

The US has its strenths in being an omnipresense. Not only does it have the largest carrier fleet it has bases around the world. It can mobilize anywhere on earth. China can’t do the same. They don’t have much of a navy nor do they have a global network of military bases and supply caches.

panarchy 3y ago
Well the belt& road initiative is probably trying to take care of that.
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  It was! But it's left a lot of nations with huge debt for projects that often haven't really helped their economies. Even when things are working mind of ok, rather than build alliances and friends (build soft power), China too often acts entitled after coming in to a place & blows the political gains they should have been making. Even when coming with a carrot to the world, China's demands-of-ego get in their own way. China does have an incredibly fast growing navy. Their military is cranking out enormous amounts of everything, at a dizzying unimaginable pace. And perhaps the Belt & Road will help that nation project power some, will serve as ports and bases. But I'm not sure. I'm not sure why they are so aggressively building their military.
  - maxglute 3y ago
    PLA spending is ~2% of GDP, what US wants NATO to spend. It's just 2% of 20T economy with huge industrial capacity and relatively efficient procurement buys a lot. And since most of the hardware is new and not replacing deprecated equipment, the number naturally increase until level will production and replacement demands balances out. Ultimately PRC is ~25% larger than US by PPP, domestic MIC is largely indigenous on operate on domestic pricing, it would be weird if they don't have comparable or larger sized fleet. Much of it is also reorganization/rebalancing away from army to navy/airforce, net personel is down, but capital equipement up. It's easier for satellites/media to report 100s of more ships and planes, but not 250,000 less soldiers.
- kjkjadksj 3y ago
  Belt and road does not make military bases much less site armed forces personnel or nuclear ordinance around the world.
  - panarchy 3y ago
    Well yeah the project is in its infancy. America doesn't just plop down military bases in places either. They build influence first. Then maybe down the line it's "we'll forgive your debt if you let us build this port for our navy" or "we'll build you a nice airport and allow you access to it if you let us use it for military purposes"
    - kjkjadksj 3y ago
      US military also paid for the political hit of stationing these warheads decades ago. It would be hard to imagine another country doing the same without triggering something like the cuban missile crisis.
gxs 3y ago
This is a common response but it seems to be one of those things that is just repeated over and over that in the end doesn’t even shed light into why china is a problem. And this is what I meant as well, people like being dismissive because it makes them feel better. Yes, the US has a global presence but it’s because it has to have one, china does not. The US doesn’t care about Taiwan just out of principle, it cares about Taiwan because in a way it’s fighting to keep all of Asia from falling under Chinese influence. China doesn’t have to worry about parking aircraft carriers off the coast of California at a moments notice because it doesn’t have to, what’s at stake is in their backyard where they are more than well prepared for combat. Also, the US has to spend resources projecting power in Europe for many reasons, which only makes it more vulnerable to a conflict with China. Can you imagine what would happen if russia decided to go to war in Europe with full aid from China while the US was also trying to fight an all out war in Asia? These aren’t some doomsday scenarios I’m coming up with here, just stating that dismissing China the way Americans do is reminiscent of the same hubris that has come to bite other nations in the ass sooner or later.