"Is War with China Inevitable?" Topic

"James Holmes, a Naval War College strategy professor writing in The National Interest, throws some needed cold water on the idea that the United States and China are destined for war because of the Thucydides Trap—the supposedly inevitable clash between predominant powers and rising powers epitomized by the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta, which was made newly popular by Harvard's Graham Allison in his 2017 book Destined for War. Holmes cautions against claims that certain events or outcomes are "destined" in global affairs. There are no inevitabilities in history or international relations. Leaders make decisions that determine peace or war.

Allison is not the first observer to misapply valuable lessons of history to current global politics. Other examples abound. Barbara Tuchman's Pulitzer Prize–winning book about the origins of the First World War The Guns of August has been misapplied countless times as an example of events and historical-social forces outside of political leaders' control resulting in war, when, in fact, it was decisions made by political leaders in Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, Great Britain, and France that determined war or peace, as well as the intensity and length of the conflict. One only has to read George F. Kennan's Decline of Bismarck's European Order and The Fateful Alliance to understand that human agency, not historical inevitability, caused World War I.

Austria-Hungary did not have to issue an ultimatum to Serbia following the terrorist murder of Franz Ferdinand and his wife. Germany did not have to give Austria-Hungary's leaders a "blank check" to wage war against Serbia. Russia did not have to mobilize its army against Germany in the days leading up to August 1914. Great Britain, as Niall Ferguson brilliantly pointed out in The Pity of War, did not have to go to war at all. Germany did not have to renew unrestricted warfare at sea and send the Zimmerman Telegram to Mexico, which led U.S. President Woodrow Wilson to ask Congress for a declaration of war. There was nothing inevitable about any of those political decisions…"

link

Armand

It all depends on how much China wants to take Taiwan, and how much whatever administration in charge in Washington wants to defend it.

With many people on both sides of aisle have interests in the chip makers in Taiwan, they will do whatever it takes to make sure China doesn't take over.

Both sides have much too lose regardless of outcome. Better off being "jaw to jaw" with China. The fear of fighting the United States is critical. Once a nation commits to open warfare, the mythic qualities of a great power can disappear. As in Ukraine.

We have laid some cards on the table in Iran. China and Russian send Iran help via the Caspian Sea to keep it going…and they get to observe how we roll in terms of air and naval ops, tech, etc. But we get experience.

China doesn't have access to the Caspian Sea))) It sends aid to Iran via Pakistan…

War between the US and China is already underway. It's just a Cold War. The only question now is whether this confrontation will escalate into a direct, heated conflict. The seizure of Venezuela and the attempt to dislodge Russia and Iran from China's ranks of current or potential allies are all integral parts of the ongoing Cold War between the US and China.
In my opinion, a multipolar world is not taking shape… It's once again boiling down to a confrontation between two superpowers. The United States managed to knock Russia and Europe off the playing board. For now, at least.

What if China started an invasion and we just obliterated the chip production facilities?

It's called the "broken nest"

Everybody loses… even the U.S., for a while anyway.

"The Reshoring Pivot: The extreme vulnerability of relying on a localized chip source is a major focus for the US, prompting legislative pushes to onshore production—such as the American CHIPS Act."

Most scenarios have the U.S. and allies losing in a direct war in the Chinese homeland fighting to stop a takeover of Taiwan.

But the simple chip industry destruction, hurts everyone. But leaves our forces intact to continue a war in the open seas, with China away from their home turf.
In addition:

"1. Immediate GDP Collapse [1]
* Massive Economic Contraction: A war over Taiwan involving the destruction of its tech infrastructure would contract China's GDP by an estimated 16.7% to nearly 25% within the first year. This translates to a direct domestic loss of roughly $2.8 USD trillion. [1, 2, 3]
* Manufacturing Freeze: China is the "factory of the world," but its manufacturing lines rely entirely on Taiwanese semiconductors to build smartphones, electric vehicles, medical devices, and home appliances. Without these "golden screw" components, China's massive export economy would instantly stall. [1]

2. Crippling the Domestic Tech and AI Sectors
* Losing Advanced AI Infrastructure: China is aggressively pursuing leadership in Artificial Intelligence. However, training its AI models relies heavily on advanced chips fabricated primarily by TSMC. Losing this supply line would paralyze China's tech giants (like Huawei, Tencent, and Alibaba) and freeze its algorithmic advancements. [1, 2, 3, 4]
* Exposure of Domestic Vulnerabilities: Despite pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into its "Big Fund" and "Made in China" initiatives, China still falls short of its self-sufficiency goals. Its domestic fabs (like SMIC) remain generations behind TSMC and cannot produce advanced sub-7nm chips at the volume China requires. [1, 2, 3, 4]

3. Absolute Diplomatic and Trade Isolation
* Draconian Western Sanctions: The deliberate destruction of an industry that enables $10 USD trillion of global GDP would trigger coordinated, severe economic sanctions from the US, the European Union, Japan, and South Korea. [1, 2, 3]
* Seizure of Foreign Reserves: Western nations would likely freeze China's trillions of dollars in foreign currency reserves and sovereign bonds held abroad. China would be abruptly cut off from the SWIFT international banking network, crippling its ability to conduct external trade. [1]

4. Severe Internal Social Instability
* Mass Unemployment: With factories unable to source chips and ports choked off by a wartime blockade, tens of millions of Chinese manufacturing and tech workers would lose their jobs. [1]
* The "Social Contract" Broken: For decades, the Chinese public has largely accepted the authoritarian rule of the Communist Party in exchange for consistent economic growth and rising living standards. A sudden, violent regression into economic depression, rationing, and isolation would severely test the party's domestic stability.
Ultimately, by forcing the issue and allowing the chip industry to be destroyed, China would be choosing a "pyrrhic victory"—gaining the physical island of Taiwan but plunging itself into a deep, prolonged economic dark age"

My friend Cuprum, as he often does, makes sense.
I think, though, that may be overstating both China's cohesion and America's success. China is currently growing in power whereas the US is currently declining.

The US and China are certainly the principal rivals and there is a strong argument that we are already in a new Cold War defined more by trade, technology, finance and influence than by tanks crossing borders. The evidence is hard to miss: tariffs, semiconductor restrictions, supply-chain reshoring, competing payment systems and rival diplomatic initiatives.

Where I differ is on the idea that Russia and Europe have been "knocked off the board."

Russia may be weaker relative to China than it was a decade ago but it remains a nuclear superpower with significant military and diplomatic influence. If anything, Beijing and Moscow appear to have moved closer together, even if the relationship is one of pragmatic alignment rather than a true alliance.

Likewise, Europe's problem is not irrelevance but fragmentation. The EU remains one of the world's largest economic blocs. The real question is whether it can translate economic weight into strategic power.I believe it is making positive steps in that direction.

My suspicion is that we're heading neither for a classic bipolar world nor a genuinely multipolar one but for something untidier: two superpowers, several major regional powers, and a great many states trying to avoid choosing sides for as long as possible.

Competition between Washington and Beijing is inevitable. War is not. Statesmen still have a vote.

Unlikely the US and Chicoms will go to war anytime soon … Both are very much interlocked economically. Much of what China produces is for the international market, e.g. the USA.

Cold War 2.0: How China Smartly Replaced the Soviet Union

link

Armand

China's best shot was grabbing Taiwan before the present administration. Or wait it out until some future time.

The continuation of Chinese advance is based on their economic advantages they have taken over the US, the Eu and the third world. Those days are over.

A sudden collpase and war 'within' China just might be inevitable.

The bigger question will be if her neighbours maintain the peace or try to take advantage of it.

14Bore,

Not sure why you would say that. Trump has been very unclear what he would do if Taiwan. At times suggesting we may not intervene. I think this might be the best time for China to invade. Although I do not think they will do that.

"The fastest way for a Great Power to lose Great Power status is to fight another Great Power."

Only bad things come out of this confrontation, whoever "wins."

No its not, probably likely because politicians and "we know what they will do" mindset.

I would refer you to the origins of WW1. The victors will write the history and in so sitting up the following war.

Meanwhile -- Xi is doubling down on internal purges! Li Xiaohong who was Xi's pointman on using the domestic security apparatus to take down factional foes for "corruption" was himself just purged for "corruption." Joining him on the gallows -- so to speak…maybe, I mean, it's China after all, are the senior leadership of the CCP's internal finance ministry and the Presidents and senior leadership of China's top banks.

Nothing says economic stability and integrity more than a leader who arrests and executes his rivals and economic advisors who disagree with him…

SBminisguy, I wouldn't expect China to be seriously weakened by internal political struggle… For a society without functioning democratic institutions, this is a natural process and its natural form. We observed the same thing for centuries under monarchies… Did this form of elite struggle weaken the state? I wouldn't say it was critical. Rather, such a society was weakened more by excessive "democracy." Let's recall, for example, Poland, which, as a result of constant internal strife, was never able to create its own empire and lost the competition to Moscow…

Both Europe and Russia are weakening as a result of the ongoing war.
The US now effectively controls Europe's energy sector, turning it into a semi-colony. European productive forces are gradually migrating to the US, as doing business there is becoming significantly more profitable. And peaceful. These aren't US actions against Europe—they're preparing for war with China. "Nothing personal—just business." Accumulating funds and opportunities. The EU's attempt to stimulate the economy with military contracts will have some effect, but in the long run, it will only worsen the economic situation. Unless a large, permanent, and profitable market for European weapons is found. The more difficult the economic situation, the weaker the EU's cohesion will become. Each will try to solve the problem on its own. The main hope for preserving the EU is to inflate the "Russian threat" bubble. This means peace in Ukraine is not needed now—an ongoing war is needed.
Russia is also now practically knocked out of the competition to create its own global center of power. All its resources are tied to the current war, meaning all other avenues are sagging. Russia is now losing all its three-hundred-year-old achievements—its access to global maritime trade routes through the Black and Baltic Seas. This is a monstrous defeat. And while this problem could now be solved by reorienting itself toward maritime trade access through the Arctic and Pacific Oceans, this would be a massive project that would take decades and require enormous investment. The other option is a major war with Europe to liberate the old trade routes, which would mean the complete seizure of the Baltics and the Ukrainian coast. In any case, Russia is bound by these problems for decades to come.

We saw this before the collapse of the USSR, didn't we? To your point, a society without functioning democratic institutions (like the State of California in the US), is opaque to normal processes. However, we can see the internal infighting as a reflection of the stability of the system. In the 1980s the USSR saw leaders come and go – Brezhnev, Adropov, Chernenko, each one accompanied by a wave of purges as the new leader established authority. Xi has been in an internal CCP civil war for about 2 years, and it's been very bloody. He's still standing -- is he the new Mao? Or is he weaker than that? Being opaque to the outside we won't know until something big happens.

Oh, if you want to re-experience those days of the 1980s you could get yourself a copy of Kremlin. It plays better while drinking, btw!

link

Political purges in the late USSR?))) Nonsense.
Then let's talk about the political purges in the US… What about the accusations of high-level politicians of corruption and working for other governments? Is Trump a Russian spy?)))
No—it's just a dirty power struggle. And communist ideology has nothing to do with it.

I hardly drink. But when I get together with friends for a nice evening, I prefer to listen to something light in the background—like the orchestra of Paul Mauriat or Ennio Moricone. However, I am almost omnivorous in music – from classical opera to heavy metal.

I can send you some Tango, Carnavalitos, Chacareras o Malambo y you want… (smile)

Armand

Collapses are sudden and unexpected. Only a n depth analysis of the Soviet fall revealed a long slow erosion. It will be the same if China or the ISA collapsed.
Would dominos fall if China invaded Taiwan? Perhaps. North Korea, Japan, India and Vietnam would all have a stake in the war.

Thank you, Tango! Too energetic for Siberia))) And for my age.

TimePortal +1

Well we know one thing for sure … Never fight a land war on the PRC's home turf. Too big and too many of them. They are 20% on the Earth's population …

Plus if they were going to attack Taiwan. We'd have to fight the war at sea and air before[if?] they got to Taiwan. Defending the island is something that the US had some experience with. Even if it was a long time ago.

And to that, the Chicoms have not seen any real combat since they fought Vietnam in '79. Along with they have 0 experience in amph invasions. Something the US has a pretty good working knowledge of.

War with the Chicoms albeit pretty remote at least anytime soon. Regardless history tells us over and over again … we have to be prepared. The pace of high-tech modern warfare moves very face. We don't have the luxury to take too much time to build up. E.g. WWI, WWII, Korea …

Political purges in the late USSR?))) Nonsense.

Do you not know your own history? The purges weren't as messy as an old fashion Stalin-style mass purge, but there were significant political purges within the Communist Party leadership. Under Andropov and later Gorbachev, thousands of officials were removed, demoted, forced into retirement, expelled from positions or even jailed as part of "anti-corruption and reform campaigns," which is how the Communist Party politely labeled the power struggles between the various factions.

Next you're gonna tell me Gorbachev delieberately ended the Cold War and that the 1991 coup attempt was real!

14Bore – I think Biden was the first President to openly say we would help defend Taiwan and he said it more than once.

Our military right now is under some strain as it expends its logistical assets over back to back operations ands maybe more to come, and rotation schedules for rest and maintenance are being stretched. If the next stop is Cuba, this will continue.
This might be a logical time to strike, more so than in Biden's term. But China is still not ready to conduct large scale amphibious operations under combat conditions. Still too much of a role for China's naval militia of private craft in getting the invasion force there. But they are building proper amphib ships.

SBminisguy, a party purge is the removal from its ranks of those who don't share the proclaimed "values," in this case, communist values.
You're simply describing inter-factional political struggle. Ideology has nothing to do with it. It's not the same thing… Similar things happen in the West, only different methods are used.
And yes, when a new political leader replaces the previous one, from an opposing political clan, they replace the entire previous team, right down to the drivers in the garage and the cleaning ladies in the offices… They appoint people from "their political clan" to all positions.

Not the same thing. In a Presidential change over, professional staff remain (the drivers in the garage and the cleaning ladies in the offices), and only political staff are changed out, usually by resigning. Some will try to remain and may be accepted or rejected and fired. But what usually does not happen is a campaign of lawfare persecution by the incoming President to jail opposition. Biden was the most Soviet in terms of that, going to lengths to pursue enemies from the Trump Admin.

I don't see the point in continuing this argument. I simply want to say that repression in China may strengthen, not weaken, Xi's power… and unite, not divide, society. The paradoxes of an authoritarian regime.

"Similar things happen in the West, only different methods are used…"

Taking that premise as valid… you don't understand anything, John Snow…

Armand

Quite the stretch on Biden, SB, given the "retribution" priorities of the DC swamp today. Historically, this may be the deepest state ever in support of maximizing Executive branch power for its own sake. FDR's challenges were quite different. But it all pales in comparison to Putin's rule.

@Tortorella -- how soon we forget…

Biden Administration Actions Criticized as Politicized Targeting or "Lawfare" Against Political Foes (2021–2025)

During the Biden presidency, critics—including congressional Republican investigations, whistleblowers, and court records—pointed to a pattern of federal actions that they argued selectively targeted former President Trump, his inner circle, conservative groups, and dissenting voices. While many actions had legal predicates (such as classified documents, clinic access violations, or Capitol security breaches), detractors highlighted the scale, timing, tactics, novel legal applications, and contrasts with other cases as evidence of weaponized government institutions.

1. High-Profile Actions Against Trump and Associates
The most visible efforts centered on Donald Trump himself. In August 2022, the FBI conducted a high-profile search of Mar-a-Lago with approximately 30 armed agents seeking classified documents. Critics described it as unprecedented for a former president, citing its broad scope (including personal areas) and arguing that Biden's own classified documents received gentler handling through the National Archives. The DOJ justified it under Espionage Act concerns.

*Trump faced four major criminal indictments timed around his 2024 campaign: two federal cases led by Special Counsel Jack Smith (classified documents and January 6-related election interference) and two state-level cases in New York and Georgia. The Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling later addressed aspects of perceived overreach.

*Trump lawyers and advisors also faced armed no-knock raids and probes. Peter Navarro became the first former White House aide jailed for contempt of Congress; internal FBI communications reportedly showed celebration. No-knock or heavily armed home raids occurred in some associate cases. Other Trump allies faced continued scrutiny from prior investigations.

2. Targeting Broader Conservative Groups
The FBI and DOJ extended scrutiny to grassroots conservative movements. Following a National School Boards Association letter comparing protesting parents to "domestic terrorists," Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo directing FBI and U.S. Attorneys to address threats against school officials. The FBI created an "EDUOFFICIALS" threat tag, leading to nationwide investigations. Whistleblowers reported concerned parents (including Moms for Liberty members) being flagged, sometimes over gun ownership or strong rhetoric.

*Pro-life activists encountered aggressive enforcement of the FACE Act. In one prominent case, Mark Houck faced a pre-dawn raid by roughly 25 armed FBI agents at his home in front of his family over an altercation with a clinic escort (charges were later dropped). Critics contrasted dozens of charges against pro-lifers with lighter pursuit of attacks on pregnancy centers and churches after the Dobbs decision.

* A 2023 FBI Richmond field office memo linked "Radical Traditionalist Catholics" to potential extremism and suggested monitoring churches; it was rescinded after backlash but fueled accusations of ideological profiling. Whistleblower documents alleged broader use of counterterrorism tools against conservatives, pro-life groups, traditional Catholics, and parents.

3. January 6 Prosecutions Designed for Maximum Political Effect
The Capitol breach on January 6, 2021, led to over 1,500 arrests and roughly 1,270 convictions or guilty pleas by early 2025. Many defendants endured lengthy pretrial detention. While felony cases involved violence or obstruction, critics noted that about 55% began as misdemeanors (e.g., trespass, disorderly conduct, or parading), with hundreds entering the building causing minimal damage. They described these as disproportionate "show trials" compared to lighter federal pursuit of many 2020 BLM-related riots. And speaking of "Show Trials," the so-called "Jan 6 Committee" public hearings were pure political theater. The committee hired James Goldston, former president of ABC News and a veteran TV producer, as an advisor to stage the hearings for maximum dramatic impact—treating them like a primetime documentary series with polished production, scripting elements, lighting, and narrative flow rather than standard congressional proceedings.

4. Censorship Coordination, Deplatforming, and the Disinformation Governance Board
The administration faced accusations of coordinating with social media platforms to suppress disfavored speech. The Twitter Files, House investigations, and the Missouri v. Biden (later Murthy v. Missouri) lawsuit revealed White House, Surgeon General, CDC, FBI, and DHS/CISA officials regularly flagging posts on COVID policies, the Hunter Biden laptop, lab-leak theory, and election integrity. Requests included removal, throttling, or deboosting—even for debatable or true content. Platforms maintained special government portals.

*In April 2022, DHS launched the Disinformation Governance Board under Nina Jankowicz to coordinate counter-disinformation efforts. Labeled a "Ministry of Truth" by critics due to Jankowicz's past statements (e.g., on the laptop story and Musk's Twitter), it faced immediate backlash and was paused after three weeks.

Specific targets included doctors and scientists (e.g., Great Barrington Declaration skeptics), Mike Lindell/MyPillow for 2020 election concerns, and broader advertiser pullouts. Courts acknowledged extensive government-platform interactions, though the Supreme Court narrowed findings of unconstitutional coercion.

5. Coordinated De-banking
Critics, including House Financial Services Committee reports, described an "Operation Choke Point 2.0" where regulators (FDIC, OCC, Fed, Treasury) used informal guidance, "reputational risk" assessments, and supervisory pressure to encourage banks to sever ties with disfavored clients. This affected crypto/digital asset firms (at least 30 entities lost access), firearms manufacturers, energy companies, Christian nonprofits, conservative tech founders, and Trump-related figures (including reports on Melania and Barron Trump accounts, Trump Organization, and Mike Lindell). Transactions with "MAGA," "Trump," or certain causes were allegedly flagged.

6. Other Patterns/Additional concerns included selective leaks (e.g., tax returns), expansive probes into Trump world, slower initial handling of Hunter Biden matters versus aggressive Trump pursuit, and use of novel legal theories with shifting DOJ priorities—collectively seen as two-tiered justice

All of this was unprcedented in American history.

SB 👍

What some have said publicly they will do, if and when they regain power, is far worse than the list above.

Indeed, 35th. Prominent Democrats, elected officials, pundits, and party-aligned figures have made strong rhetorical statements framing "MAGA" and Trump supporters as an existential threat to democracy. They have called for various forms of accountability, legal action, cultural ostracism, and structural changes to prevent future Trump-like movements. These statements intensified around elections and post-January 6.

Here is a compilation of notable examples (direct quotes or close paraphrases from public records):

1. Calls for Prosecution, Punishment, and Public Humiliation
James Carville (longtime Democratic strategist and pundit): In an October podcast episode, he described his "fantasy dream" for after Democrats regain power in 2029: "I think they all ought to have their heads shaven. They should be put in orange pajamas and should be marched down Pennsylvania Avenue, and the public should be invited to spit on them. The universities, the corporations, the law firms, all of these collaborators should be shaved, pajama'd, and spit on." He referred to Trump "collaborators."

Broader commentary from liberal podcasters and politicians has anticipated prosecuting Trump's MAGA allies and "humiliating" them when Democrats return to power.

2. "Re-education" and Cultural/Political Isolation
Paula Collins (Democratic candidate opposing Rep. Elise Stefanik, NY-21, 2024): Discussing recovery from a "MAGA nightmare," she said: "re-educating basically, which that sounds like a rather, a re-education camp." This drew backlash for evoking authoritarian tactics.

Indivisible (major progressive/Democratic-aligned group) strategy documents: Emphasize making the "MAGA brand toxic," forcing Republicans to "pay an electoral price," and holding "MAGA Republicans accountable for their extremism" to push it to the fringe.

3. Structural Changes and Preventing Recurrence
Mallory McMorrow (former Michigan State Senator and prominent Democratic voice): "We have to make sure when we win, we ensure someone like Trump never takes power again… We have to codify all of those norms and rules into law so that nobody can ever do what Donald Trump did ever again… Building up an infrastructure to ensure that somebody like Donald Trump never takes power again."

Multiple officials and surrogates have described MAGA as a threat requiring "maximum warfare" (e.g., House Democratic rhetoric) and long-term efforts to relegate figures to "the museum halls reserved for tyrants and traitors."

4. Broader Rhetoric from Officials
Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and others repeatedly called MAGA an "extreme threat to our democracy," "semi-fascism," or an "existential" danger. This framed supporters as enablers of authoritarianism, justifying heightened scrutiny, investigations, and deplatforming/de-banking efforts during their administration.

House and party communications often tied "MAGA Republicans" to extremism, with calls to "break MAGA" and ensure accountability through legal, electoral, and institutional means.

Yes the mantra "anything is ok when you are attempting to overturn Hitler and his Facists followers". Even nominating someone who had an SS tattoo for years.

Honestly SB, in my life, I never thought admitting to being a Communist was not viewed as being as bad as being a Facist, in the U.S.

Being a communist is now viewed as acceptable and some have even been elected to offices.

This is DH territory my friends, let's take care…me and you!

CHINA IS REHEARSING MORE THAN AMPHIBIOUS LANDINGS

link

Armand

China Could Win Taiwan Without Fighting

link

Armand

US couldn't repair battle-damaged ships in war with China, study finds

link

Armand

Japan is the home of the US 7th Fleet and is willing and able to handle some of this issue, as far as I know. This does not meet all needs and does not solve the problem. A new skilled and experienced admin in the DOD is needed with the will to address better planning, procurement issues, lobbyists running Congressmen, outsourcing, the right stuff talent-wise, etc. I don't know how this could happen, but I believe we could do better with skilled and effective administrators.

"One of the U.S. Air Force's B-2 bombers fired an AGM-158C Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM) during a recent live-fire sinking exercise (SINKEX) in the Western Pacific. The stealthy LRASM was not previously known to be in the B-2's arsenal. Integration of the AGM-158C offers a huge boost in capability for the B-2, creating a penetrating fleet-killing platform that could be especially valuable in a future high-end fight in the Pacific against China.

"The Pacific Air Forces successfully conducted a live-fire Sinking Exercise using the B-2 Spirit north of the Mariana Islands. The B-2 deployed the Long Range Anti-Ship Missile, demonstrating enhanced ability to achieve strategic objectives within range of potential threats," according to a press release today from Pacific Air Forces (PACAF). "With the deployment of the LRASM from the B-2 Spirit, the Pacific Air Forces takes a major step forward in countering maritime threats. This milestone showcased impressive high-end innovation reinforcing the US military's commitment to safeguarding national interests and maintaining global security."
"

Subject: US B-2 bomber sinks target ship with long-range missile in Pacific exercise


link

Honestly SB, in my life, I never thought admitting to being a Communist was not viewed as being as bad as being a Facist, in the U.S.

Being a communist is now viewed as acceptable and some have even been elected to offices.

Funny thing is they may call themselvse Communists, but their policies and actions are more Fascist! Makes sense, two sides of the same coin of Socialism. AND their "solutions" are all to address problems caused by socialistic and poorly concieved and implemented policies.

SB +1

An interesting article about Russian-Chinese military cooperation:

link

The West has managed to achieve the impossible – practically re-establishing the Russian-Chinese alliance… I hope this will at least contribute to the restoration of communist power in Russia.

Incidentally, the Chinese demonstrated their new microwave installations for destroying various devices, including Starlink satellites, at the parade:

link

link

Not true… they're actually giant screens for watching the Football World Cup….

Armand

China is building a massive ship that should scare Americans about the future

link

One Enemy, One Strategy

link

Armand

Is China a Peaked Power? And So What If It Is?

link

Armand

It was predetermined in the 1980s. The longer the U.S. waits, the worse the outcome.

Paul Kennedy in The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers tied the decline of the major states to economic/imperial global over-reach. The decline happens when states overspend on their far flung ambitions and bite off more than they can chew in controlling global resources. They spend themselves into massive debt and decline, often on huge and ultimately unsustainable militaries to defend their economic empires.

Subject: Army tests 'Hammer of the Gods' system overseas for first time | Fox News


link

For a second there … I thought those were "Rods from God" …
But I think those are said to "not exist" … But may be just holding those cards close to the chest. And way beyond TS. Until the kimchi really hits the fan.