Now I’m worried.
“stressing need for talks” is language used when a war is looming. Otherwise, constant talks between nations are something that doesn’t need mentioning at all.
I mean, he was in Singapore talking about Asia-Pacific tensions, which adds some context. As a standalone headline, yeah, an umprompted reassurance like that is terrifying.
“Apple assures users new iPhone with neural implant won’t take over their mind while asleep to be used for data collection and ads placed in dreams”
“Glock assures customers it’s new model of handgun’definitely will not shoot backwards at the person firing it’, more at 11”
Well if I wasn’t 100% sure that’s exactly what they do before, I am now.
I can’t remember where I’ve seen it, but several high-level American military leaders, like generals and planners, have stated that war with China is inevitable within something like the next ~3-6 years. There was even a leaked internal memo on it. It’s not just them or me talking shit. The US Navy and Marine Corps has even started restructuring and practicing for it. They’ve started switching their doctrines to using smaller spread out units and the Marine Corps even got rid of tanks entirely. There’s also been a political efforts to move chip manufacturing from Taiwan to the continental US and establishing general manufacturing in Mexico to develop economic independence from China.
I just got up, so I’m too lazy to post links, but do an internet search. It seems pretty real.
People have been saying shit like this for 30 years. It’s not inevitable, but there is a risk and they want to be prepared for it.
deleted by creator
I think war with China is still unlikely. China still depends too much economically on the US and friends, and the US and friends still depend too much on China for making stuff.
There’s a very serious game of brinksmanship going on right now in the South China Sea, with China playing this (to me) weird and bitchy game of using military vessels to damage other countries’ vessels or people, but with the “not weapons” parts of their military vessels (water cannons or flares or etc). To me it is just fuckin weird pussyfooting “I’m not touching you I’m not touching you” behavior, but they’re doing it to countries like the Philippines that have defense agreements with the US which is the kind of thing that has the potential to escalate in sudden and unplanned fashion sometimes. This is a pretty good overview. I agree with you that it would be terrible for both countries, but sometimes weird and unplanned shit happens when weapons and big nations are involved.
Also, this statement from the OP article I don’t think is fully accurate:
Neither side budged from their longstanding positions on Taiwan — which China claims as its own and has not ruled out using force to take
The US doesn’t have a longstanding position on Taiwan, other than that we give them weapons and like to talk loudly and pointedly about democracy and how much we like them. We’ve spent 60 years refusing to say one way or another whether we think they’re part of China, or whether we would defend them if China attacked them with military force, and for some reason that’s been working so far. Diplomacy is weird.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
This is a pretty good overview
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I see, so it’s the naval version of the stick battles on the Indian border
While this is true, the fact that war would be a bad idea doesn’t necessarily mean it won’t happen. People make bad decisions all the time.
It would destabilize the global economy and trade. there is absolutely no chance anyone would risk that. Or maybe they would. who am I to know?.
We said the same thing about Putin invading Ukraine. We somehow believed that the neoliberal globalized economy would allow only wars to destabilize certain regions to make resource exploitation easier for the global powers. Well turns out eventually the global powers are facing off with each directly after running out of proxies.
They said the same thing before WW1 as well. People back then were saying the world is too connected and a big war would disrupt everything so badly that no one would risk it.
But then the sleepwalking took over.
I mean, it would probably be a good opportunity for a handful of really rich people to further their control and ownership globally…so as long as our billionaire overlords value human life over their own personal power we should be good.
That’s a good point… Oh…oh no… Oceania is going to war with Eastasia and Eurasia
We’ve been shifting imports out of China for quite a few years now. If you look at “made in” labels, I’m sure you’ve noticed that they’ve changed from China to Taiwan, Thailand, El Salvador, hell I got a shirt recently that was made in Jordan. I’d never seen that before.
While a lot of stuff is still made in China, that shift means it won’t cause a huge destabilization, at least for the US. Of course it will still cause problems, but they’re already trying to limit the potential damage.
Pandemic accelerated it a lot. Couple projects I was on were to move production lines out of China to Mexico, Malaysia, and India. The move to India was pre-pandemic to avoid Trump tariffs. The other two were during the pandemic to avoid Chinese lockdowns.
China <> US relations have actually been at a much better place this last half a year. This articles pretty big on the fear mongering.
China may start a war over Taiwan, but that would be the only thing really that would realistically lead in that direction, and the the West would probably do a Ukraine where they just supply aid, not actually get involved in the fighting. If we were ready to fight on behalf of Taiwan we’d be recognizing them as a country and sending high profile diplomatic visits regularly etc.
More or less all of the CCPs geopolitical and economic efforts would be undone by a war, the world already hates the CCP and it’s not going to make them more likable if they start a war. Plus there’s no real benefit to the west. It’s not like anyone is looking to occupy China, the CCP knows this they just use the idea as propaganda for their own people.
Taiwan makes all the microchips. The US military needs chips for all the nukes and spy satellites. I think the US government would opt for violence long before they turn around and be like “fuck it, pentium 1s are good enough” like Russia did with those secondhand 350nm machines.
Not sure if they could get the Arizona TSMC plant to cooperate or even keep it operational once said war happens, but that’s an option too. Every time I’m hearing about that plant it’s just more problems and delays but who knows.
On a lighter note, I can’t wait for some Russian made 2025 486s with clock multipliers higher than 4x to start popping up on ebay. It’ll go with my retro gaming setup nicely.
This is exactly why, the US has been quietly pushing extremely hard to build large modern fabs here (although many are in Texas which is stupid).
This is the best summary I could come up with:
SINGAPORE (AP) — United States Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin told a gathering of top security officials Saturday that war with China was neither imminent nor unavoidable, despite rapidly escalating tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, stressing the importance of renewed dialogue between him and his Chinese counterpart in avoiding “miscalculations and misunderstandings.”
In his own speech, Austin lauded how Marcos “spoke so powerfully last night about how the Philippines is standing up for its sovereign rights under international law.” But when pressed later, he would not say how the U.S. might react if a Filipino were killed in a confrontation with China, calling it hypothetical.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who has been pushing for more air defense systems from Western allies, arrived unannounced on Saturday evening and will take part in a panel discussion on Sunday.
To counter the Chinese activity, the U.S. has been ramping up military exercises in the region with its allies to underscore its “free and open Indo-Pacific” concept, meant to emphasize freedom of navigation through the contested waters, including the Taiwan Strait.
He suggested that could trigger conflict with China, citing ally Russia’s claim that NATO’s eastward expansion was a threat, which President Vladimir Putin has used as an excuse for his invasion of Ukraine.
Expressing the concerns of some in the region, Indonesian academic Dewi Fortuna Anwar said any de-escalation of tensions “would be very welcome to this part of the world,” but wondered whether the U.S. would allow China’s assertive military posture to grow uncontested if Washington’s main emphasis was now dialogue.
The original article contains 1,028 words, the summary contains 259 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
As an example of how powerful it is to have a narrative edge in war. where a government can easily get away with a crime against humanity, without any consequences.
I did.
I don’t troll. Not my thing.
Your post history would disagree, but I think it is best we stop this discussion entirely.
Well, only the China has been able to rise to become a stronger contender than all others. It’s obvious that the USA sees the China as a threat to its global dominance and superiority.
That was also true of the Soviet Union, and despite all the close calls and proxy wars the two never quite went to open war with one another
The China is not the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union fell to its bad management. while the China is much more focused and goal-oriented, moving forward in unison at all levels.
Right, but I’m not saying it is. My point is that the fact that someone is challenging American hegemony doesn’t mean there has to be war. There was definitely enough time in which the Soviet Union looked strong and unlikely to collapse to show that.
both sides know this, neither of them wants to be seen as the aggressor because then the other side will have a narrative edge for their action. like the Imperial Japanese Army did in Pearl Harbor, where the US government took the opportunity to justify their use of Weapons of mass destruction on Japanese civilians.
Are you really suggesting that the U.S. will conduct a nuclear first strike against China?
I have not, that’s your interpretation. Lol
Okay, then why talk about Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Is there a reason you keep saying “the” China?
