this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
172 points (97.8% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
3529 readers
133 users here now
Rules:
- Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
- No spam or soliciting for money.
- No racism or other bigotry allowed.
- Obviously nothing illegal.
If you see these please report them.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean, geopolitically speaking China can profit from a Russian loss, basically dragging them fully to their sphere
It really is the ideal outcome for China, for Russia to be weakened as much as possible by this war.
A shame about the newfound NATO unity and defense spending.
Yeah, but Russia could act as the buffer between China and NATO, even if it's in their sphere
But one of NATO's great strengths is its power-projection capabilities, something which is only being strengthened by a renewed NATO and increased defense spending amongst its members. NATO was never going to end up bordering China, but NATO power could be extended to defend Taiwan, or other Chinese neighbors, which is the real concern of the Chinese government.
But I like to think this graffiti is just from good guys/gals who are in Kyiv for whatever reason - volunteer work, business, tourism, w/e. Humans being bros.
About the Taiwan thing... Couldn't China just block exports to the US and cripple its economy to make them leave Taiwan defenceless?
A good question. There are a couple of caveats to that:
Most Chinese exports to the US are consumer goods. Especially after the COVID pandemic reinforced the need for strategically self-sufficient vital industries. It would hurt, no doubt, and increase unrest, but it's not fundamentally crippling to the basic functioning of the economy. It's toilet paper and household good shortages... again.
Blocking exports to the US would hurt China as well. But more than that, blocking exports to the US would mean the US would pressure everyone we have influence on (ie a good chunk of the world economy) to sanction China in turn, which would be even more painful to their economy. China is the US's 3rd largest trade partner. The US is China's largest trade partner.
That would remove almost all incentive for the US NOT to intervene - ie if China is already trying to strangle our economy, how much more can they do, short of nuking us? In other words, Chinese ports would be blocked by USN battlegroups, and that's a LOT more deadly to the Chinese economy than 'No trade with China' is to the US economy. Not only that, but Chinese intervention to Taiwan would undoubtedly be assaulted by US forces in such an event, leaving China both strangled and its offense neutered.
They still have all the countries that hate the US to trade with, and I don't know if American society would be able to resist the export ban, mainly because I don't even know how the entire country isn't embroiled in civil war.
So it's all up to the Army and the Navy
What, all three of them? Iran, North Korea, and... Russia? I guess they'd still trade with Mongolia, since Mongolia doesn't really have a choice, being sandwiched between Russia and China. Maybe a few Central Asian nations?
Everyone else either hates China more than they hate us, or knows what side their bread is buttered on.
Nothing brings people together like an outside foe.
Idk, I'm just saying that we shouldn't underestimate China. If we underestimate them, they can beat our asses, if we overestimate them and it turns out they weren't as powerful then their ass gets beaten. It's definitely better to not be confident on a victory
Oh, I agree with that. My point is more that it won't be economically or diplomatically that they'll be able to contend. It will come down to force, if it comes down to anything.
Yeah, but it will be a long struggle, that's what I'm saying
Not necessarily. I wouldn't place any bets on it being long or short. It could be a near-instant KO, or it could be a years-long grind, albeit in the latter case it would either be because the US declined to directly intervene, or because China accepted being put under permanent blockade as the cost of doing war.
NATO won't ever be directly involved against China. It's strictly there to "keep the peace" in Europe and North America. Several NATO countries, however, might agree to try and contain an expansionist China.
NATO doesn't mandate involvement; however, let's not pretend that NATO countries don't regard each others' interests as deeply related even when not directly covered by treaty.
True!
Drain Russia financially, then eat them when nothing
is left. Like a true parasite