Its an interesting take, but the Military's sole purpose isn't to fight China. Its to scare smaller nations into the USA sphere of influence, or to destabilise those firmly outside it.
China might win the first battles with that rocket barrage, but it will also firmly cut itself off from world trade - ores, food, gas, oil. There's no winning move.
China needs merely wait a few generations (if it has the patience) and it will have a much easier time asserting itself. Alternatively, to just buy off Western politicians (as it is already doing) - which beats rockets for cost efficiency.
China has made alliances with a lot of african nations. If the shit hits the fan I - at least - wouldn't exclude the possibility that china is better positioned in a semi-post-nuclear scenario than the US (russia, africa, china are the most relevant rare-resource exporters, to my knowledge)
And I personally wouldn't count a bit on saudi arabian allegiance in a scenario like this. I wouldn't be surprised if they just follow the "strong wo:man" in the world, which right not still is the US.
China faces a huge logistical challenge if it wants to rely on Africa for food and ore. Sending cargo ships from South West Africa to East Asia is a long and perilous journey.
Africa itself is an unstable part of the world, the people are not friendly to China, and the population is growing rapidly. Its easy to see the local population turning on Chinese citizens or businesses in the event of some economic or food shortfall.
By contrast the USA basically has all of the resources it needs inside its own country or nearby allies. Many of the 'rare' resources of the world are not particularly rare, they are just too expensive or too environmentally damaging to mine in the West at current prices.
I'm surprised that China doesn't just offer to buy whole sections of Africa, and formally annex the land into its country, and move (voluntarily) the existing African populations as part of the payment terms. For example, the GDP of Mozambique is $16b - China has 200x this value just in USD reserves.
Because at any time Mozambique can just nationalize Chinese assets and renege on any contract it signs with China. Investing in Africa is like running a payday loan store. It only works if your loans get repaid, and if the effort you have to wage (in this case, probably war or trade war) to get your loans repaid is worth it. The US will happily defend any nations that spurn China
I would say the key to US/China War is South America. Considering how badly the North has treated their neighbour - it would keep me up at night. If the army sorties to the other side of the world, who's left back home?
Comments
Its an interesting take, but the Military's sole purpose isn't to fight China. Its to scare smaller nations into the USA sphere of influence, or to destabilise those firmly outside it.
For example, the coup in Bolivia: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/was-coup-against-evo-moral...
China might win the first battles with that rocket barrage, but it will also firmly cut itself off from world trade - ores, food, gas, oil. There's no winning move.
There are large-scale dysgenic Demographic changes occurring in the West: https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-...
China needs merely wait a few generations (if it has the patience) and it will have a much easier time asserting itself. Alternatively, to just buy off Western politicians (as it is already doing) - which beats rockets for cost efficiency.
The article you linked dismisses the "dysgenic" idea immediately. Yet that's what you picked to make your point?
Surely you must've known some of us would read the article. It concludes with wild swings and guesses...I'm wondering why you linked it.
I'm on mobile and lacking the patience to type a more nuanced, thoughful reply. I suppose "we shall see" will suffice.
China has made alliances with a lot of african nations. If the shit hits the fan I - at least - wouldn't exclude the possibility that china is better positioned in a semi-post-nuclear scenario than the US (russia, africa, china are the most relevant rare-resource exporters, to my knowledge)
And I personally wouldn't count a bit on saudi arabian allegiance in a scenario like this. I wouldn't be surprised if they just follow the "strong wo:man" in the world, which right not still is the US.
China faces a huge logistical challenge if it wants to rely on Africa for food and ore. Sending cargo ships from South West Africa to East Asia is a long and perilous journey.
Africa itself is an unstable part of the world, the people are not friendly to China, and the population is growing rapidly. Its easy to see the local population turning on Chinese citizens or businesses in the event of some economic or food shortfall.
By contrast the USA basically has all of the resources it needs inside its own country or nearby allies. Many of the 'rare' resources of the world are not particularly rare, they are just too expensive or too environmentally damaging to mine in the West at current prices.
I'm surprised that China doesn't just offer to buy whole sections of Africa, and formally annex the land into its country, and move (voluntarily) the existing African populations as part of the payment terms. For example, the GDP of Mozambique is $16b - China has 200x this value just in USD reserves.
Because at any time Mozambique can just nationalize Chinese assets and renege on any contract it signs with China. Investing in Africa is like running a payday loan store. It only works if your loans get repaid, and if the effort you have to wage (in this case, probably war or trade war) to get your loans repaid is worth it. The US will happily defend any nations that spurn China
I would say the key to US/China War is South America. Considering how badly the North has treated their neighbour - it would keep me up at night. If the army sorties to the other side of the world, who's left back home?