Imagine if the global manufacturing giant (China) decided to "manufacture" some naval combat vessels... anybody remember the American "Clipper" around 1776 and afterwards?
Zeihan's entire analysis pre-supposes the need for a return to the Cold War and maintenance of a strategic Russia-Europe rivalry. This might be in "America's" best interest were it to attempt to retain its' global empire, but short of that, it's a tenuous "assumption" at best. His "desires" for American global domination "trump" his "intellect".
Zeihan is an analyst that combines demographics, economics and geographical realities into a compelling presentation. This is a guy that walked into StratFor, told the boss there that his analyses were flawed and way off and why... and landed a job there. Zeihan has been pretty damned on the nose at identifying trends ahead of his peers. He's not "blind" to the flaws and mistakes of globalism made, and will call bullshit on sugar-coating and rose-colored glasses views.
I'm glad he's on our (America's) side.
He generally laughs at the idea of a Chinese threat even in the long term. Australia has *right now* the ability to shut down the Straits of Malacca, and with that no oil from the Middle East gets to China, and not long after that half of them starve. At the same time, half of them are going to die of old age within the next decade anyway. China is the Enron corporation on its death bed.
I don't share your "optimism" unless the US is at war with China for some stranga and unspecified reason. Yes, we've a tech superiority in weaponry (at the moment) and Australia "could do some sh*t.... but why would they?
China doesn't have anywhere to go, especially if its idea is to conquer and hold territory. Four years after we left a 20 year war in Vietnam, the Chinese tried to take Vietnam and got their asses handed to them. Where you get the idea that their already collapsing economy would survive sanctions and be a threat to anybody?
Meanwhile, China begins to flip the Zeihan's script...
Oh me, oh my, oh no! China has finally achieved what Japan was doing on the regular nearly 100 years ago.
Their "newest carrier" (if we mangle the definition of "carrier" to include their other two modified casino resort boats) isn't nuclear and will have the operational range of "oh shit turn back we're out of gas."
That's a different problem altogether. Fuel oil for cargo ships and Chinese "supercarriers" ::cough cough giggle:: is more expensive than diesel or gasoline. Russia will want money, not Chinese yuan for it.
No matter how many billions of dollars China spends on a "supercarrier" that has to save at least half of its fuel for the trip home or to a fleet of tug boats to bring it home, far far over the horizon is a guy watching it via satellite and trying to decide which inch of it would be the most hilarious to hit with a missile that costs way less.
So how many missiles do you think you need to launch simultaneously to saturate a Chinese Supercarrier's AAW systems? Provided she don't have a screen of two cruisers and four destroyers to get tnrough first?
...or are you gonna try out one of your new hypersonic ASW missiles? Id use an Iranian supercavitating torpedo, if I eere use. SSTD is a much harder nut for the Chinese to crack.
How many missiles? Enough to do the job, which would still be well below what it cost the Chinese to build the "supercarrier" that will never sail within range of being a threat anyway.
China's not going to do a damned thing without explicit orders from Wal-Mart.
China is shocked at the power of stockholders. The voluntary divestment from Russia by corporations like McDonalds and BP's holdings in Rosneft were not mandated by international sanctions... business leaders and investors did that to Russia on their own initiative. The Chinese Communist Party is stunned at the power of free people and free markets.
Since China imports over 80% of everything they need to function as an industrialized nation, deglobalization will KILL THEM ALL.
Jack London's dystopian fantasies of bombing China with chemical weapons from hot air balloons isn't necessary. We can just turn off the lights and let the rats and spiders take over.
China isn't going to even to pull their eyelids apart wider and give a defiant look to their masters that will slap the shit out of them.
Those docile Denisovan primates religiously "know" desire is the cause of suffering. As American consumers, some 4.36 Chinese people belong to each of us, and they better get their asses back to work on our next cellphones and cups of bubble tea or there will be an ass-whoopin.
Imagine if the global manufacturing giant (China) decided to "manufacture" some naval combat vessels... anybody remember the American "Clipper" around 1776 and afterwards?
ReplyDelete...America could certainly play the "piracy" game for a while and shut down trade routes, but would it? Why?
ReplyDeleteZeihan's entire analysis pre-supposes the need for a return to the Cold War and maintenance of a strategic Russia-Europe rivalry. This might be in "America's" best interest were it to attempt to retain its' global empire, but short of that, it's a tenuous "assumption" at best. His "desires" for American global domination "trump" his "intellect".
ReplyDeleteZeihan is an analyst that combines demographics, economics and geographical realities into a compelling presentation. This is a guy that walked into StratFor, told the boss there that his analyses were flawed and way off and why... and landed a job there. Zeihan has been pretty damned on the nose at identifying trends ahead of his peers. He's not "blind" to the flaws and mistakes of globalism made, and will call bullshit on sugar-coating and rose-colored glasses views.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad he's on our (America's) side.
He generally laughs at the idea of a Chinese threat even in the long term. Australia has *right now* the ability to shut down the Straits of Malacca, and with that no oil from the Middle East gets to China, and not long after that half of them starve. At the same time, half of them are going to die of old age within the next decade anyway. China is the Enron corporation on its death bed.
I don't share your "optimism" unless the US is at war with China for some stranga and unspecified reason. Yes, we've a tech superiority in weaponry (at the moment) and Australia "could do some sh*t.... but why would they?
ReplyDeleteChina doesn't have anywhere to go, especially if its idea is to conquer and hold territory. Four years after we left a 20 year war in Vietnam, the Chinese tried to take Vietnam and got their asses handed to them. Where you get the idea that their already collapsing economy would survive sanctions and be a threat to anybody?
ReplyDelete+^+
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, China begins to flip the Zeihan's script...
ReplyDeleteTrue and Biden is kissing their bums in China. Didn't you see the chocolate all over Biden's mouth! :p
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, China begins to flip the Zeihan's script...
ReplyDeleteOh me, oh my, oh no! China has finally achieved what Japan was doing on the regular nearly 100 years ago.
Their "newest carrier" (if we mangle the definition of "carrier" to include their other two modified casino resort boats) isn't nuclear and will have the operational range of "oh shit turn back we're out of gas."
Maybe the Russians will sell them some.
ReplyDeleteI've crossed the Pacific many times, beamish. The ships weren't nuclear, and we didn't have to stop once for more Bunker C.
ReplyDeleteThat's a different problem altogether. Fuel oil for cargo ships and Chinese "supercarriers" ::cough cough giggle:: is more expensive than diesel or gasoline. Russia will want money, not Chinese yuan for it.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how many billions of dollars China spends on a "supercarrier" that has to save at least half of its fuel for the trip home or to a fleet of tug boats to bring it home, far far over the horizon is a guy watching it via satellite and trying to decide which inch of it would be the most hilarious to hit with a missile that costs way less.
So how many missiles do you think you need to launch simultaneously to saturate a Chinese Supercarrier's AAW systems? Provided she don't have a screen of two cruisers and four destroyers to get tnrough first?
ReplyDelete...or are you gonna try out one of your new hypersonic ASW missiles? Id use an Iranian supercavitating torpedo, if I eere use. SSTD is a much harder nut for the Chinese to crack.
ReplyDeleteHow many missiles? Enough to do the job, which would still be well below what it cost the Chinese to build the "supercarrier" that will never sail within range of being a threat anyway.
ReplyDeleteChina's not going to do a damned thing without explicit orders from Wal-Mart.
We probably know more about where China's ships are than the Chinese navy.
ReplyDeleteThey won't shoot back? That's so "white" of them. :)
ReplyDeleteChina is shocked at the power of stockholders. The voluntary divestment from Russia by corporations like McDonalds and BP's holdings in Rosneft were not mandated by international sanctions... business leaders and investors did that to Russia on their own initiative. The Chinese Communist Party is stunned at the power of free people and free markets.
ReplyDeleteSince China imports over 80% of everything they need to function as an industrialized nation, deglobalization will KILL THEM ALL.
Jack London's dystopian fantasies of bombing China with chemical weapons from hot air balloons isn't necessary. We can just turn off the lights and let the rats and spiders take over.
China isn't going to even to pull their eyelids apart wider and give a defiant look to their masters that will slap the shit out of them.
Those docile Denisovan primates religiously "know" desire is the cause of suffering. As American consumers, some 4.36 Chinese people belong to each of us, and they better get their asses back to work on our next cellphones and cups of bubble tea or there will be an ass-whoopin.
ReplyDelete