Love him or hate him, China was afraid while Trump was president. I think the inevitable war will occur shortly after the 2024 election when the world will know who runs the US, the US or China. If it's once again the US then that will push the date for China back out to whenever the US screws up and elects the 1st millennial president. If it's once again China then 2025 looks more realistic. They'll need to move before Biden falls off a stage and cracks his skull open.

At the onset of nukes the only country pissed off enough to use them was the US and history remembers that as well.

The real threat will come from however many terrorists have slipped into the US. As horrific as 9/11 was, there was no real damage done to military capability nor governance but a recurrence COULD be distracting enough for larger, better equipped players to make a move, especially if they orchestrated it from the background. MSM and social media would provide the cover for the follow up strike. Infighting in the streets and DC would ensure huge casualty rates.

The only safety line would be if the Pentagon stayed out of the politics that would follow and kept their head on a swivel. This may also require a coop to cut the red tape blocking reaction time.

23 minutes ago, BE88 said:

 

Several Taiwan companies have plans to build large microchip and other factories in the US, they have already been under construction for some years with huge investments in billions also with US state funds and will be operational soon within two years

 

 

These are SMALL fabs, compared to what is in Taiwan.

 

Don't fool yourself.

 

 

14 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

I think the inevitable war will occur shortly after the 2024 election

 

If this is true...

Then....

It's been nice knowing you.

 

As you say, war is a real possibility.

 

Let us hope for no war, or, ...

We will never again be able to rebuild civilization as we now know it.

 

Our greatest fear should be war between China and the US.

 

This must never happen.

 

ALL COMMENTS above this comment of mine are nonsense, basically.

 

A war between China and the US can never be won.

 

Check out the science.

 

 

14 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Let us hope for no war, or, ...

We will never again be able to rebuild civilization as we now know it.

Not sure that's an all together bad thing. Civilization as we know it is pretty screwed up.

 

A swift, decisive strike during a meeting of a dictatorship style government such as China, Russia, N. Korea, Iran, etc. i.e. several large bunker buster bombs right in the heart of the meeting amid chants of "death to America" and such would disrupt their abilities to react as there are no built in layers of leadership like the US, the UK, Australasia, etc. have (and however screwed up we think them to be.), they DO have a leadership layer that can be put into place in a matter of hours.

Whether or not that layer can be affective or trusted is another matter.

We will soon know why there are no aliens.

 

Fermi paradox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

 

There are no aliens because they have already self-destructed after reaching a certain level of technological advancement.

 

We will self-destruct, too.

 

This is just high school statistics.

 

This is a statistical certainty.

 

It's only a question of when.

 

Fortunately, though, less intelligent life, such as amphibians, will thrive after we are gone.

 

And, the amphibians may continue to post topics on TV, after humans have become extinct.

 

 

 

 

 

If we must fight a war over Taiwan, with China, then it is good to know what we are fighting for.

 

In my opinion, what is most wrong with the typical Taiwanese personality is....

An Identity Crisis.

 

Just think about it.

 

First, you had some sort of Dutch rule up north.

Next, you had an invasion of Chinese from the west.

Third, you had the Japanese subjugation of the island beginning around 1895.  They came in and cut down all the hinoki cypress trees on the Betel Mountain near Alishan, and even built a small scale railway to ship this wood back to Japan to build tiny wooden huts.  Huts which were mostly destroyed during the Tokyo Firebombing, which was a war crime, by the way.

Fourth, you had the Americans giving Taiwan to China.  But then, the Americans became Indian Givers and gave the island back to the KMT, so that Jiang could escape by the skin of his beard, across the Taiwan Strait.

Fifth, and then you now have the old guard, the WaiShengRen dying, and taking their SiChuan chefs up to heaven, with them.

Sixth, and then you have that guy AHH-BIAN, whose wife was run over repeatedly by a truck or something.  And then he went to jail for some reason.

Seventh, and now you have the same old crowd of people in government.  And what are they good for?

 

Is my recounting of Taiwanese history correct, so far?

 

And why should we fight and spill blood for this motley crew?

 

If XI wants the island of Formosa, then we should even pay him to take it off our hands.

 

There are PLENTY of other better islands in the area.

 

Let's keep Japan, though.

 

Everybody wants us Americans to leave Japan.

 

Japan owes the Americans its constitution.

 

By the way, I just finished watching some strange Japanese movie, but it was just too boring for me.

 

The title of the film is something like...  In The Realm of the Senses....

 

Pretty interesting....

 

 

 

I love Japanese music.

I am very happy here.

 

But, of course, I have always loved Asian music....

And most music originates from China, is my guess.

 

Instruments such as the erhu, for example....

 

What do you think?

 

Will we all die in a thermonuclear orgasm, as we probably expect?

 

Or, will we luck out?

 

 

14 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

 

The Chinese navy has more boats. But very few are meant for deep water, and most have a limit of 1500 km. in ideal condition, not in a warlike environment. And they have very few deep water ports. The US has 800 deep water ports, US military personnel are stationed in 160 countries, all over the world, and they have 11 nuclear aircraft carriers, 72 destroyers, 17 cruisers, 50 attack submarines, 14 ballistic missile subs, and much more. Close to 500 ships total. China is severely limited in range, while the US has ships that can stay at sea for 4 years at a time. In terms of the airspace, China is pathetic. The Chinese lack 4th and 5th generation fighter jets, and advanced drones. They have one aging bomber, while the US reigns supreme in the air. The US has 13,233 aircraft, many of them are very advanced. China has 3,260 and they lack the top strata of fuel tankers, limiting their range severely. They only have three air tankers, compared to 625 for the US. The differences are glaring. Also, China has just over 900 helicopters, compared to over 5,400 for the US, many of them very advanced. Not much point in going into the nuclear superiority, which is 13x greater than China. If it comes to that, all bets are off, but those 5,244 warheads are quite a deterrent. So are the 1,419 strategic warheads and missiles. 

 

https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/JIPA/Display/Article/2870650/why-china-cannot-challenge-the-us-military-primacy/

 

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-chinas-airpower-stacks-against-united-states-195831

 

 

And you think that China is expansionist? What a joke. The US is the greatest threat to world peace and stability. All these bases you so proudly points out is not for peace but solely to protect America’s interests only. The set up of China’s Navy is for self defence, not offence, hence no need for long range and deep sea capabilities.

 

Some of you Americans are totally out of touch with reality and the sentiments of the global majority.

On 11/13/2023 at 12:07 PM, sirineou said:

Individually , for many might have little affect, though I doubt it.

It would certainly change the lifestyle we are used to, and I don't care how old one is, when the time to check out there are very few of us who don't wish for one more day. 

there are very few of us who don't wish for one more day. 

 

I'll be thinking about all the DVDs I have and never got around to watching ( DVDs are available from op shops for $1 or $2, so I have plenty to watch "when I have time" ).

I have nothing else to regret leaving undone.

On 11/16/2023 at 2:02 AM, mrwebb8825 said:

Whether or not that layer can be affective or trusted is another matter.

I'm glad you qualified that.

 

In NZ the largest organised and armed bodies would likely be the gangs, and IMO they could take over without much resistance. One would prefer death to that.

Don't even imagine the military could, as it's almost invisible and has been reduced to something less than pathetic since our last war. Police force? less than almost invisible. Can't remember the last time I saw one.

On 11/16/2023 at 2:02 AM, mrwebb8825 said:

A swift, decisive strike during a meeting of a dictatorship style government such as China, Russia, N. Korea, Iran, etc. i.e. several large bunker buster bombs right in the heart of the meeting amid chants of "death to America" and such would disrupt their abilities to react as there are no built in layers of leadership

Jokin' right? They don't keep all the nukes in their back pockets and other people can fire them too.

It's not called MAD for nothing, as one would have to be mad to think one can take all the nukes out in a first strike.

On 11/16/2023 at 4:18 AM, GammaGlobulin said:

Will we all die in a thermonuclear orgasm, as we probably expect?

Orgasm is not the word I'd have chosen to describe being turned to a shadow on a wall.

On 11/16/2023 at 1:53 PM, Gweiloman said:

And you think that China is expansionist? What a joke. The US is the greatest threat to world peace and stability. All these bases you so proudly points out is not for peace but solely to protect America’s interests only. The set up of China’s Navy is for self defence, not offence, hence no need for long range and deep sea capabilities.

 

Some of you Americans are totally out of touch with reality and the sentiments of the global majority.

If I had to choose, I'll choose the US over China as masters of the world.

On 11/16/2023 at 4:18 AM, GammaGlobulin said:

And why should we fight and spill blood for this motley crew?

WE don't have to fight for them. Give them enough weapons to stop the Chinese landing and job done.

If that annoys the Chinese, tell them to go complain to the Tibetans.

On 11/15/2023 at 8:02 PM, mrwebb8825 said:

Not sure that's an all together bad thing. Civilization as we know it is pretty screwed up.

It is what it is! We are humans so any human civilization will be tempered by those things that makes us human. You cant change human nature and remain human, you can just try to control the devil in us and promote the better angels in us.

Though there are  many negatives, civilization at this time is not so bad as compared to the past, so we are making improvements. 

People romanticize the past , because they remember the good things m but chose to forget all the bad. Decease , hunger, bad health and hygiene, bad living conditions, life expectance, education,Ethnic cleansing.  etc All things that have improved, so there is cause for optimism. 

On 11/15/2023 at 8:02 PM, mrwebb8825 said:

Whether or not that layer can be affective or trusted is another matter.

They are all liars !!  Its just that they are their liars, and not our liars. All you can do is to use a critical mind when listening to our liars, or theirs.  Remember that most of what you know about their liers, is what your liers have told you about them.

  Think about it, can you think of any instance in the past, that what the official narrative was totally

true?? Then why would you think that it is true now? 

It almost feel like Charlie brown , Lucy and the football, where Lucy always pulls the football at the last moment an Charlie Brown fals, but she always manages to convince Charlie that this time she will not. 

55 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

there are very few of us who don't wish for one more day. 

 

I'll be thinking about all the DVDs I have and never got around to watching ( DVDs are available from op shops for $1 or $2, so I have plenty to watch "when I have time" ).

I have nothing else to regret leaving undone.

Regret leaving you wife or children to live the rest of their lives without you.

I will fight tooth and nail not to leave my wife and daughter along. 

7 minutes ago, sirineou said:

People romanticize the past , because they remember the good things m but chose to forget all the bad. Decease , hunger, bad health and hygiene, bad living conditions, life expectance, education,Ethnic cleansing.  etc All things that have improved, so there is cause for optimism. 

 

All things that have improved,

 

Hmmmmm. Are you sure about that?  Covid, a bit of ethnic cleansing going on as I write, along with hunger ( massive starvation looms caused by Sudan war ) bad health ( diabetes and cancer are endemic ) and bad living conditions ( people living in cars in NZ ). The common denominator is that those examples are entirely or likely man made disasters ( while the jury is out on whether covid was man made, the disaster that followed was IMO man made ).

5 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Regret leaving you wife or children to live the rest of their lives without you.

I will fight tooth and nail not to leave my wife and daughter along. 

I would agree with you if I had a wife or children. I have neither. Not even a nephew or niece to mourn my departure. Something that will become more common place as western people have less or no children.

18 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Its just that they are their liars, and not our liars. All you can do is to use a critical mind when listening to our liars, or theirs.  Remember that most of what you know about their liers, is what your liers have told you about them.

It all becomes simpler if one assumes that everything a politician says is a lie, till proven otherwise.

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Jokin' right? They don't keep all the nukes in their back pockets and other people can fire them too.

It's not called MAD for nothing, as one would have to be mad to think one can take all the nukes out in a first strike.

never mentioned nukes. keep it conventional BUT, STOP advertising the time and date of future actions.

17 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

never mentioned nukes. keep it conventional BUT, STOP advertising the time and date of future actions.

The problem with that is that if a nuke possessing country loses a conventional war they sure as are going to go full on nuclear.

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The problem with that is that if a nuke possessing country loses a conventional war they sure as are going to go full on nuclear.

based on what historical data? The US, Russia and China basically control the world and NONE of them are willing (so far) to allow minor, nuke capable countries to "test world response" to the use of even "tactical" nukes.

Ever since the US put "The Fear of God" into the world by dropping on Japan it's been nothing but saber rattling by everyone.

I think, (IMHO) that ANY minor country that launches would be obliterated from the face of the Earth by all 3 "super-powers" no matter which one "controls" them, even if only to assure their own survival.

12 hours ago, mrwebb8825 said:

based on what historical data? The US, Russia and China basically control the world and NONE of them are willing (so far) to allow minor, nuke capable countries to "test world response" to the use of even "tactical" nukes.

Ever since the US put "The Fear of God" into the world by dropping on Japan it's been nothing but saber rattling by everyone.

I think, (IMHO) that ANY minor country that launches would be obliterated from the face of the Earth by all 3 "super-powers" no matter which one "controls" them, even if only to assure their own survival.

??????????????

You do realise that there has never been a situation where a nuclear power faced defeat since they were invented, don't you?

You think Russia would not use them if ( I know it can't happen, but just supposing ) if Ukraine was actually able to defeat Russia and looked like conquering them, with Zelensky entering the Kremlin as the victor, do you?

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

??????????????

You do realise that there has never been a situation where a nuclear power faced defeat since they were invented, don't you?

You think Russia would not use them if ( I know it can't happen, but just supposing ) if Ukraine was actually able to defeat Russia and looked like conquering them, with Zelensky entering the Kremlin as the victor, do you?

Since your first statement is untrue, the rest of your post is apocalyptic speculation. Why do you think the US never used nukes in Afghanistan?

The "powers that be" are far too greedy to let the "spoils" spoil. Now, had the entire Middle East come together to attack the US during the Afghan war... maybe. Same goes for Europe v Russia. Why do you think everyone is just sending "things/money" and not people to Ukraine? Zelensky's a hack and everyone knows it. The only way he'll enter the Kremlin is in handcuffs or a coffin as a trophy.

If you recall your history, Afghanistan beat Russia long after Russia had nukes yet it stayed conventional and they slowly and quietly left.

There's a much better chance of huge escalation over oil than grain exports. In a warped way, it's probably why the US sent $1B to Iran who funds Hamas and claimed it was for "hostages". A way out of funding Ukraine is needed by the US as it's draining the economy faster than it was supposed to.

On 11/28/2023 at 12:19 AM, mrwebb8825 said:

Since your first statement is untrue, the rest of your post is apocalyptic speculation. Why do you think the US never used nukes in Afghanistan?

Strange comment. The US never faced a situation in which Afghans would have taken over the US.

No country is going to use nukes in minor conflicts such as in Afghanistan.

On 11/28/2023 at 12:19 AM, mrwebb8825 said:

If you recall your history, Afghanistan beat Russia long after Russia had nukes yet it stayed conventional and they slowly and quietly left.

I seem to remember history better than you. Russia left Afghanistan because Gorbachev took over, and it wasn't slowly or quietly. They just left.

16 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I seem to remember history better than you. Russia left Afghanistan because Gorbachev took over, and it wasn't slowly or quietly. They just left.

When Gorbachev took over he knew they were beaten and pulled out to save the wasted effort. It's often referred to as "Russia's Viet Nam".

On 11/30/2023 at 2:36 AM, mrwebb8825 said:

When Gorbachev took over he knew they were beaten and pulled out to save the wasted effort. It's often referred to as "Russia's Viet Nam".

Ah, the myth that American missiles won the Afghan war with Russia still exists I see.

There was a lot of American propaganda at that time and still believed apparently.