This little article is a collection of images, videos, glimpses and thoughts of China this July 2021.  Like all of my articles, you won’t see any of these glimpses outside of China. Instead you will get the same pre-manufactured agenda of hate and fear.

For us as a people, as a species, as humans we have to be able to communicate, experience things together and share.  And that requires unrestricted, unbiased, glimpses into the totality of other cultures. And given the absolute strangle-hold that American and Western governments have over global media, that is a Herculean task.

This article is my little tiny contribution. I wish for all of us to better understand each other. I want us to see things as they are, and not be manipulated by others with evil corrupted intent.

Soon, a newly funded barrage of Anti-China media will be launched. (As if we aren’t soaked already) And this one, funded to the tune of millions of United States (freshly minted) dollars will interject hateful lies in just about every article coming out of the West. It will be all inclusive.

Here’s a short video of how the BBC “doctored” up one of an expats videos depicting China to make it look ugly, cold and grey. You MUST view this…

Not just simply lies and distortions, but intentional interjections of specific terms used to vilify China. Of course, the purpose is to “suppress” China, but it is also “setting the table” for a major war with China. Well, at least that is what the Washington K-street neocons desire.

I watch all of this in horror.

But, I can’t do much about it. All that I can do is open up some lines of communication and insight. As in all of my articles, click on the pictures to see the short movie. (All are very short, but gives a great overview of what is going on.)

First up…

Henan floods

The past week saw days of continuous heavy rainfall in central China’s Henan province.

According to the National Meteorological Center, the accumulated rainfall reached 622.7 millimeters in the provincial capital, Zhengzhou, between 2 a.m. Tuesday and 2 a.m. Wednesday, more than double the 24-hour threshold of 250 millimeters for extremely heavy rainfall.

Several factors, including atmospheric pressure, a typhoon and topography of the region, have contributed to the unusual downpour.

There have been numerous stories of how people helped each other out during the floods. Rufus’s engaged, and people working together as one. It is truly uplifting. More than 100,000 people had been evacuated by Thursday morning.

This massive effort was helped by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army and the People’s Armed Police Force dispatching their servicemen and equipment to assist local police and firefighters in emergency rescue and relief work.

Do you see all those people running up to cheer on the fire and rescue staff? No, it’s not Hollywood. It’s what China is really like. You have no idea just how proud and patriotic the Chinese are.

Here we have the PLA mobilized and ready to help. One thing you learn when you are in China is how quickly China can mobilize and get things done.

And here’s another video. All in all, I find it particularly impressive.

From Richard Turrin

I have been following Richard Turrin on LinkedIN. He's a scholar and an author of numerous books and he has some very insightful and profound articles and points of view. His takes on issues within China are worth reading. Here is one of his introductions to an article from the economist. Which is a really strong pro-USA, anti-China screed.

This article dances around the edges of the recent tech crack-down in China. Calling out China’s efforts to reel in its tech companies while glossing over the details.

First, let’s broach something cultural, that should be evident by now. China’s regulators could care less about disturbing the short-term stock market value of their tech sector. That may strike many as shocking but it’s a fundamentally different take on their job. Compare it to regulators in the West who do everything possible not to disturb markets.

No better example of this can be found than yesterday’s hammering of education sector stocks following announcements affecting curriculum and profit status for after-hours private schooling.

Is it better, to have such disruptive regulators? No, not necessarily, but it suits China. China is changing at a pace that most in the West cannot conceive of. This is where I think this article goes wrong. Without these fast-acting regulatory circuit breakers, a fast-moving country like China would simply be out of control.

China’s regulators are fundamentally concerned about the direction tech is taking society and act decisively though not always swiftly to counter imbalances. China’s after-hours school programs are an example as they were causing disturbances and inequalities in the educational system.

Should they have caught it earlier? Certainly, and the same argument might be made for Ant. I talk about this in Cashless.

The Economist article raises an absurd issue of changing tech’s business models. For both the edutech sector and Ant a strong argument can be made that their business plans were contrary to the public good.  Edutech stripping teachers from the classroom, Ant providing credit without limit. Changing tech’s business models is a good thing, if they are causing harm. Perhaps someone should take a look at Facebook.

As far as Didi seeking protection in the courts, we’ll have to wait to see whether this is warranted. Didi appears to have been advised to call off its IPO in a fashion similar to Ant. Certainly, a last-minute pull-back would have warranted howls, but in the end, both Didi and investors would have been better served.

It’s not a question of whether China’s system is better than the West’s at dealing with BigTech. China’s system works best for China, there is little likelihood its decisiveness will be exported.

That may be unfortunate, as big tech in the West appears beyond regulation regardless of the damage it causes. For all of the cries of foul in the markets, China is setting itself up for a better digital future while the West does nothing.

I know markets prefer the West’s approach, but society just might be better served by China’s.

Some Chinese food – Chinese / Vietnamese

Well, I tend to eat a lot of delicious Chinese food. I believe that the reason is because It is delicious. And it is cheap. And it is all around me. And… oh, all the pretty girls eat Chinese food. Well, at least in China they do.

Here is the interior of a local chain restaurant in a local mall. This one serves Chinese / Vietnamese food. If you read the BBC, CNN, or FOX “news” you might be under the impression that everyone in China is starving and just waiting to be “liberated” for democracy™ and freedom™. Not true. Not even remotely true.

Here’s the interior of the restaurant.

And here’s some of what I ate.

The first thing that came to the table was this delicious fish. Instead of steamed, deboned, and served with lemon which is common in the states, this fish was gutted, filled with spices and baked. Then served with lime and some seasonings that you dip the tasty morsels into.

The next thing that was brought to the table was some curried meat. I said in the video that it was beef. No. It was chicken. Still quite tasty. Not everyone likes curried foods. But I do. It’s rich and thick broth is oh, so flavorful.

Our meal, was a typical Guangzhou style meal. One creature that swims, one that flies (or tries to), and one that walks on all fours. Which is the next dish brought up…

And then they brought out this pork meal. The pork is cut up in tiny, tiny morsels and mixed with green beans and spices. You then place a spoonful in the lettuce and you eat it like a taco. It’s a “finger food”, which is generally uncharacteristic of China. But it’s good, and goes well with the wine that we were drinking.

It was a great meal.

What’s up next?

Well, long time MM readers will recognize that I always associate delicious food with beautiful women. The two go hand in hand. Like Turkey and stuffing, or a cell phone and APPs. Or, perhaps a car and tires.

Some pretty Chinese Ladies…

On Tictok (Douxing) are all sorts of filters that work with AI to “enhance” your movie postings. One of the popular ones, for the attractive ladies, is for the face to be all messed up and colored and smeared with blue paint. Personally, I don’t really “get it”, but then again, I am from a different generation. In “my day” we were sensible with fads and fashion. We had “pet rocks“, “earth shoes“, and “Choker collars“.

And then we have this nice lass. She reminds me of a “Southern Fish Fry”, which is a kind of BBQ that you have in the South-East of the United States. She’s got all those “charms” that I find so personally attractive.

This girl here is most certainly a pizza-pie-lass. When I look at her, I can’t help but think of steamy hot pizza, right out of the oven, a nice tossed salad, some bread-sticks with a saucy dip, and lots of salt and hot peppers. I know, I know, you might argue that she is more of a bread with sausage called Focaccia con Salsiccia (in Italian) kind of girl. But let’s not quibble over these minor points.

This next girl is completely delicious. We see her in her house, probably her bedroom. And I can’t help myself. I just want to share a nice chicken soup, and a light bacon, lettuce and tomato sandwich with her. And you know, what else? That’s right. A fine iced tea with some orange and mint.

She’s an afternoon, luncheon kind of girl.

This next girl is certainly a “Horn of Plenty” kind of girl.

China, like anywhere else, has people in all shapes and sizes. This is a more robust girl. She is a full meal. And While I have referred to her as a “Horn of Plenty” kind of woman, there is no question that she is as hearty as a pot roast with wine, and a round steak served with mashed potatoes.

Here’ a nice chocolate fudge kind of girl.

I really like fudge, but piping hot chocolate fudge on a nice tasty vanilla ice cream is one of my little pleasures in life. That and cats. Anyways, here’s a nice chocolate fudge kind of girl.

And a “stop traffic” kind of girl…

Though, I would refer to her as a chocolate Fudgsicle kind of girl myself. You know, the kind of girl that teleports you to your childhood when you were at the pool on a hot, hot Summer day. And you had this particular crush on one of the young lifeguards at the pool…

Fudgsicle kind of girl.

Temporary Ferry Building

Much of what you see in China are temporary constructions. These nice, clean and spartan structures are all going to be torn down in a year or two. As the new enormous structures are being built. It’s amazing, and unheard of in the United States.

What a difference 15 years makes…

China has devoted time, and energy to clean up it’s environment on every level. From enforcing change with the Corruption Police, to enacting clean standards, to planting plants everywhere, including on urban bridges, to a massive reforestation effort nationwide. An you can actually see the results.

It’s astounding.

Just like America is sinking millions of dollars in anti-China propaganda, China is putting money in promotion of being conservators of the environment. It’s everywhere. Take care of the world. Take care of the environment. take care of others. And then everyone can have a great life together.

You see this everywhere.

China’s war on poverty

We hear the headlines about how China has lifted over a billion people out of poverty. And we look at the stats, and we look at the results. And it is truly impressive. But that’s only a small part of the story. China is uniting. Everyone is contributing. Everyone is working together, and everyone is doing their part.

Like this singer…

We see glimpses of people on the lower social tiers eating a big heaping bowl of plain rice because that is all they can afford. Or an old man trying to sell some apples with a colostomy bag hanging on his back. We see the frustration and the trials and the strife of those who haven’t eaten in weeks, or who are going though strife and turmoil.

China, the people of China’s message to everyone, is “we will not abandon you”. You are not alone. The entire nation is coming together to the betterment of all.

China is a nation of Rufus.

Going on the defense…

With all the pro-war unity that is gathering in the United States for a war with China, don’t eve be under the impression that China is not aware of it. They are, and have been very busy strengthening their own military. And it is nothing like what is presented within the American (Western) media. It’s strong, powerful, ENORMOUS, and lethal.

And here’s another…

And here’s another…

Robots… robots… robots…

China leads the world in the development and production of robots. And since China is always cost sensitive, these expansive machines keep on going down in price. Here’s a nice video of a local ping-pong hall. It’s sort of like how we have “Pool halls” out in the United States. Check out the robots.

Some Dim Sum

Originally a custom in Cantonese cuisine, dim sum is inextricably linked to the Chinese tradition of yum cha or drinking tea. Teahouses sprung up to accommodate weary travelers journeying along the famous Silk Road.

Dim sum is an umbrella category for small Chinese dishes. Typical examples of this food are small dumplings, wrapped foods such as won tons and egg rolls, and other foods. In general, individual portions of dim sum are small, so that numerous dishes can be ordered and sampled by the table.

Dim sum is a large range of small Chinese dishes that are traditionally enjoyed in restaurants for breakfast and lunch. Most modern dim sum dishes originated in Guangzhou in southern China and are commonly associated with Cantonese cuisine. In the tenth century, when the city of Guangzhou began to experience an increase in commercial travel, travelers concurrently began to frequent teahouses for small-portion meals with tea called yum cha, or "drink tea" meals. Yum cha includes two related concepts. The first is "yat jung leung gin", which translates literally as "one cup, two pieces". This refers to the custom of serving teahouse customers two pieces of delicately made food items, savory or sweet, to complement their tea. The second is dim sum and translates literally to "touching heart", the term used to designate the small food items that accompanied the tea drinking.

-Wikipedia

And this is a Chinese salad.

No, it doesn’t look anything like the chunk of iceberg lettuce, one tomato wedge and a big dab of salad dressing that you find in most American restaurants. Oh, use, of course you can order a “cob salad”, or a “caesar salad”, or any other kind of specialized salads in the United States. But in general, if you order a meal, and it comes with a “salad”, all that “salad” is is just a chunk of iceberg lettuce.

And here’s one of my favorite dishes in China. It’s eggplant.

I know. It doesn’t look anything like the way eggplant is cooked in the West. It also doesn’t taste anything like it either. it is great, and I only wish that you could smell the aroma.

And one of my top favorites…

This is called Shao Long Bao. And it is just delicious. Xiao long bao is the most delicate Chinese dim sum on earth. It has a delicate skin with the savory meat filling and a high umami soup holding within the pleated pouch. You will be amazed by the treasure elixir oozing from the paper-thin skin when you poke it gently with the chopsticks.

High Speed Trains

America doesn’t have anything even approaching this. In fact, it just seems to me that all America is doing is just *nothing*. It’s a lot of talk, and churning out tons and tons of money that it manufactures out of thin air. Anyways, the trains are awesome!

Buying American Debt

The big news on the economic front last week was the frantic calls from America to China. At least four times China refused, and flatly refused, to buy any American debt. They are not stupid. America has a history of forcing, frightening, manipulating, or doing “dirty tricks” to get another nation to buy it’s debt. And then after a few years, America “pulls the rug out from under that nation” and their economy collapses.

China will not allow that to happen.

And since the debt is so astronomically enormous right now, everyone knows that it is impossible to ever pay back. So buying it is like chaining yourself to a heavy rock and throwing yourself into the ocean. China won’t have anything to do with it.

So what’s left for America?

Not much.

• Raise the interest rates. If it does, it will severely cut in it’s ability to spend. Inflation would immediate skyrocket, and the stock markets would take some serious hits.
• Cut back on everything; all forms of government programs at an extreme level. Military. Social. Basic services. Everything.
• Start a war. Convince Americans to pay attention to it, and in the distraction reduce their quality of life. Then loot the losing nation. The American leadership avoids the guillotine, and a war in a far-away land with generate endless piles of money for defense contractors.

Given the funding priorities, which option do you believe will be taken?

“U.S. political leadership has doubled down on the status quo rather than adapt to the needs of the people. 

Instead of following through on widely supported policies such as universal healthcare, student debt relief and a living wage, the Biden administration has increased the military budget. 

Instead of reducing the prison population, the Biden administration has increased weapons transfers from the Pentagon to local police departments. 

It should come as no surprise that U.S. presidents struggle to maintain favorability ratings above 45 percent while Congress generally hovers at around half of such support. 

Change is hard to come by, even when such change is desired by most of the population and is required to preserve human life itself in the case of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

China does not have such a problem. 

The Communist Party of China (CPC) maintains popular support because adaptation is a key pillar of its governance model. 

Many in the U.S. and the West have been taught that the CPC does not allow criticism, both inside and outside of the organization. This is categorically false.”

Bus stops in China

Listen to my narrative on a comparison between Chinese bus stops and American city bus stops. There really is a big difference. In America having an enclosed bus stop costs money, as does adding a bench, or a trash can. These are too expensive for most cities to accept. Not so in China.

On a ferry

Here’s a little video that I took on a Chinese ferry. Boy oh, boy does it show just how astoundingly different Chinese ferries are from their crappy-old American counterparts. Anyone who has been to China can see the difference. It is stark.

Fishing in China

One of the things that I love to do… when I encounter a “know it all” rabid anti-China fellow American… When they start to lecture me on all the prepackaged propaganda phrases that they regurgitate…

…I ask them…

“What you you think about the toll roads in China?”

And they look at me, like a deer in the middle of a road staring at the headlights of an approaching car.

Or, I ask them “tell me about what you don’t like about fishing in China”.

And they have no idea what to say, because both of those items are never mentioned in the propaganda barrage that controls the mindless slave-serfs.

This is what fishing in China looks like…

Some Chinese songs by 胡66

Hu 66, whose real name is Hu Rui, was born in 1998 in Fuyang County, Jiangsu Province, Chinese mainland female singer and network anchor.

In October 2017, she joined Cool Dog Live as a contracted network anchor.

In December 2017, the release of the song “Empty As Well” officially entered the acting world, in April, the release of the first single “Innately Difficult to Guess” , and in June, the release of the song “The Waveman” , with which the song won the Pop Music Annual Audience Favorite Singles of the Year Award on May 6, 2019

I hope you enjoy these two songs as much as I do.

Finally…

Do you want more?

You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.

.

Articles & Links

.

• You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
• You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
• You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
• You can find out more about the author HERE.
• If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
• If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.

After four solid years (the Trump / Pompeo years) of beating the war-drums against China, and a fever-pitch of anti-China propaganda, along with Taiwanese nationalists clamoring for a War on Taiwanese soil (to be defended by the United States), and the Australian (Morrison) government demanding that Australia fight China with every effort…

…it all came to a screeching end.

Why?

Did they all come to their senses? Did they realize that any war with China will be a war that is unwinnable? Did they finally realize that starting a nuclear war will hurt their chances of reelection? What is going on?

Here’s a number of articles that might provide some insight.

The first article is a an American neocon publication. 
It essentially says that...

[1] Any war with China will be conventional. 

[2] That it will be fought either inside of China or in the neighboring lands next to China. 

[3] That American military cannot fight it at this time. It needs from five to ten years to prepare. 

[4] Preparation will require an enormous outlay of cash. 

[6] The cash would be used to upgrade the forces and weapons to "take on China". 

[7] And in five to ten years, the United States would be much stronger politically, militarily, socially, and culturally and thus a war would be welcomed by the American people.

[8] That the USA and it's allies will take on China, who will stand alone without any neighbor support.

I call bullshit on all these thoughts.

Well, for one thing, a war with China has been fought using Weapons of Mass destruction since 2016 when John Bolton launched the carpet bombing of China with Bio-weapons, and the BRI was attacked with a micro-nuke in Beirut by America using Israel by proxy.

So keeping the war conventional is off the table.

And the idea that American allies will want to battle China, their neighbor, is also a “pipe dream”. An the USA will not be fighting China alone. They will be fighting both China and Russia who share military treaties, and who have staff in both military headquarters.

I also must say that the “big elephant in the room” is completely and totally omitted from this dialog. Which is, of course, that China has forcefully and clearly stated (over and over again) that any attack on China; it’s people, it’s territories, and it’s borders will be considered an act of war, and will be responded to with the HARSHEST and MOST DANGEROUS MEANS available. And that means nuclear weapons.

Which is why China is now mass producing unstoppable MIRV warhead hyper-velocity ICBMs, with artificial Intelligence, and which are designed to blast America cities into glass and debris.

But, you know, just ignore the warnings… right?

But you do need to get into the minds of these people. And notice what they omit from their calculus, the assumptions that they make, and the published reactions to their madness on their internet platforms.

[1] Gradually and Then Suddenly: Explaining the Navy’s Strategic Bankruptcy

“How did this happen to a force that, as recently as two decades ago, dominated the world’s oceans to a degree perhaps unequalled in human history?”

Empire Woes

Christopher Dougherty 

11 https://anti-empire.com/gradually-and-then-suddenly-explaining-the-navys-strategic-bankruptcy/

The U.S. Navy is on the verge of strategic bankruptcy. Its fleet isn’t large enough to meet global day-to-day demands for naval forces. Due to repeated deployments and maintenance backlogs, the fleet also isn’t ready enough to meet these demands safely, nor can it quickly surge in an emergency. Finally, the fleet isn’t capable enough to meet the challenges posed by China’s increasingly modern and aggressive People’s Liberation Army Navy. How did this happen to a force that, as recently as two decades ago, dominated the world’s oceans to a degree perhaps unequalled in human history?

The answer is gradually and then suddenly.

Myriad authors have responded to the Biden administration’s Fiscal Year 2022 defense budget request with a mix of confusion and consternation. Critics have directed their ire, in particular, at the budget’s treatment of the Navy, given the administration’s purported focus on China as a strategic competitor. However, the issues noted by critics aren’t limited to this budget, but reflect a persistent trend since at least the FY2019 request, which was the first defense budget request to prioritize China as a strategic competitor. Despite the need for “urgent change at significant scale” to meet the Chinese military challenge, the last four budget requests have offered only measured change at moderate scale.

Why is that?

The stock response is usually a mix of bureaucratic inertia, service parochialism, and congressional obstruction. Inertia and parochialism are powerful forces, but hardly insurmountable ones, especially when facing a clear and pressing challenge. While Congress certainly determines the final shape of the authorized and appropriated budget, it has less influence on the executive branch’s initial budget request. Moreover, the bureaucracy, the services, and key components of Congress all generally agree on the core precepts of the 2018 National Defense Strategy. Specifically, they recognize that China is the most pressing military challenge facing the United States; the U.S. military response should focus on deterring Chinese aggression against U.S. allies, partners, and vital interests in the Indo-Pacific region; deterring China rests on a credible ability to defeat its aggression or deny China its objectives; and that this form of deterrence will require new methods of fighting wars backed by modernized air and naval forces.

The real impediments to urgent change are a lack of consensus on the risks posed by China, a lack of a shared vision for the future of the fleet, and limited options for implementing a new vision. Even if the Pentagon and Congress could reach consensus on these questions, the U.S. military lacks mature defense programs and the industrial capacity to build them at scale. These gaps aren’t unique to the Navy, but it serves as a useful example for the rest of the Defense Department because its gaps are so glaring in the context of the current strategic environment.

Lack of Consensus

While the U.S. defense community mostly agrees that China is the “pacing challenge” for the Department of Defense, there is much less consensus on what kind of threat China poses, or when the risk of conflict will be most acute. Some analysts believe that China poses an immediate threat.

This position usually, but not always, correlates with a belief that competition below the threshold of war — like seizing unoccupied features in the South China Sea — represents a greater concern than the possibility of conventional war, such as over Taiwan.

Others are more concerned with America’s medium-term vulnerability due to China’s rapid military modernization and the increasing age of the U.S. Navy fleet.

This perspective tends to correspond with a belief that conventional war in five to 10 years is the most pressing risk.

Still others are most worried that Chinese investments in AI and quantum computing could allow it to “leapfrog” the United States in the long-term military-technical competition, thereby establishing itself as the world’s foremost military power.

Lack of a Shared Vision

Any strategist’s view of what the Navy should look like will be shaped by how that strategist assesses the challenges posed by China and the distribution of risk across time.

Someone focused on near-term day-to-day competition will tend to prioritize a large, highly ready fleet to maintain naval forces in key waters like the South China Sea.

Someone concerned about the risk of conventional war in the next five to 10 years would sacrifice some near-term readiness and capacity to build a force capable of winning a future conflict with China.

A defense planner or strategist who prioritized the long-term military-technical competition would eschew near-term investments in order to go all-in on next-generation systems with game-changing technologies that maintain the Navy’s technological advantage over the People’s Liberation Army Navy.

Further complicating this picture is the way that these risk assessments and future visions tend to correlate with different groups within the defense community.

Traditional Navy advocates tend to fall into the “near-term group,” as it aligns most closely with their strategic vision of the Navy as a force that sustains the global order and ensures peace through forward presence. In this view, the fundamental purpose of the Navy is to be “haze gray and underway,” showing the flag across the world’s oceans. Persistently maintaining this overt forward presence demands large numbers of highly visible surface vessels like frigates and destroyers.

Pentagon force planners, programmers, and analysts tend to worry about conflict in the medium term because that coincides with the five-year Future Years Defense Program, and conflict scenarios are a critical benchmark for the ability of the force to execute the defense strategy. From their perspective, a bigger fleet isn’t helpful if it lacks the capability to intervene directly in a war with China because it’s too heavily weighted toward surface vessels that are vulnerable to China’s arsenal of long-range missiles.

Meanwhile, the research and development community, technologists, and horizon-scanning organizations like the Office of Net Assessment typically fret about the long-term military-technical competition. From their perspective, the traditional navalists and force planners are dangerously shortsighted. Every outdated, non-upgradeable piece of equipment acquired today or in the near future could become a white elephant that the department can’t divest quickly enough when AI and other technologies transform warfare.

The competition between these visions plays out yearly with each program review and budget submission and is partly responsible for a raft of recent studies and white papers on the future of the fleet. In these debates, near-term navalists advocate for increased readiness spending and acquiring more small surface combatants to reach the Navy’s goal of 355 ships and increase its ability to meet the demands of the geographic combatant commands.

Mid-term force planners push for platform upgrades, additional munitions, more submarines and undersea systems, and longer-range carrier aircraft. Long-term technologists argue for greater research and development spending and investments in leap-ahead unmanned and autonomous systems to create a radical new fleet architecture comprising large numbers of unmanned and autonomous systems.

The result of this competition between perspectives is usually an unsatisfying compromise that creates a fleet that’s not big enough for navalists, not capable enough for joint force planners, and not farsighted enough for the futurists.

Some believe that the 2020 future naval force study represents a shared vision for the future fleet. Developed cooperatively by the Navy and the Office of the Secretary of Defense — particularly the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation — this document presents a 30-year shipbuilding plan with purportedly realistic cost estimates.

There are reasons for skepticism, however. First, this plan was developed under the last administration, and it’s likely that the new team is closely reviewing its assumptions and analysis, especially regarding the budget and costs.

Second, the Navy has released countless “realistic” 30-year shipbuilding plans over the last 30 years, and none of them has ever come close to fruition.

Finally, the study doesn’t clearly articulate a vision of the future Navy, but instead lays out an overstuffed buffet of future forces with something for everyone. Navalists see a return to the glory years of Secretary John Lehman, the 600-ship Navy, and the 1980s maritime strategy.

The force planners get excited about the huge growth in undersea systems and the Combat Logistics Force — both of which would be critical in any conflict with China — and are sanguine about the possibility of a more distributed and resilient fleet architecture.

The futurists look at the huge investments in unmanned systems and have hope that the Navy has finally “gotten religion” about the disruptive potential of advanced technologies. The problem is that the Navy will never build all of these ships because the plan rests on overly optimistic budget assumptions and would require 30 years in which no major event intervenes to shift U.S. defense spending priorities.

Determining what gets cut when the budget axe inevitably falls depends a lot on the initial assumptions about risk and the overarching vision of the future Navy.

Lack of Options

The Navy’s FY2022 request suggests that the Biden administration will pursue a mix of the medium-term and long-term approaches, given its emphasis on advanced munitions and research and development alongside cuts to the legacy surface combatant fleet.

These proposed ship cuts, combined with the lack of replacements in the budget, are yet another shoal barring the Navy’s path to a fleet of more than 300 ships. It is the failure to address this persistent shortfall that has truly aggravated the Navy community.

Blake Herzinger summed up this position perfectly in War on the Rocks, writing that “The Biden administration’s Fiscal Year 2022 defense budget was an opportunity to arrest the Navy’s decline and recapitalize the fleet to address this uncertain future. Instead, its authors elected to perpetuate a status quo that would see the fleet continue to wither, while the competition surges ahead.”

The problem with this line of reasoning is that there are few credible short-term options to recapitalize the fleet. The Navy has been trying to retire its aging Ticonderoga cruisers for years without a proper replacement in the works since the cancellation of the next-generation cruiser (CG-X) program.

The proposed retirement of four littoral combat ships in the 2022 budget request seems to indicate that the Navy may have belatedly recognized that it is unsuited to the demands of competition and conflict with China. And yet the Constellation class frigate isn’t ready to swap out for littoral combat ships and won’t be a one-for-one replacement given its higher cost.

The lack of options becomes painfully acute if one ascribes to the mid- or long-term perspectives of the China threat. Further upgrades to the Arleigh Burke destroyers and Virginia submarines that comprise the backbone of today’s fleet will require new clean-sheet designs that are at least a decade away or more.

Unmanned surface vessels offer a way to increase the Navy’s capacity within reasonable budget constraints, but current ships are immature, as are the concepts and analysis needed to integrate them into the fleet. They simply aren’t a viable near-term option to backfill proposed cuts to the surface fleet. The Navy has become like a sports team filled with aging superstars. It knows change is needed, but its choices are limited to proven systems with long-term limitations, or immature systems with significant technical and conceptual risks.

Even in areas where mature designs exist, like the Burkes, Virginias, and Constellations, there isn’t enough capacity at the shipyards to enable a rapid fleet recapitalization or sustain a larger fleet. This reflects a longstanding trend to consolidate and rationalize the defense industrial base in search of efficiency.

The downside is a lack of slack capacity and the flexibility it enables. To his credit, Herzinger notes this limitation in his article, and other navalists such as Jerry Hendrix have frequently decried the state of the U.S. shipbuilding.

Still, the reality is that aggressive fleet recapitalization isn’t possible without major up-front investments in industry that would require additional time and money. From industry’s perspective, these investments require predictability — there’s no sense in building new facilities and hiring and training thousands of workers without an unambiguous long-term demand signal from the Pentagon and Capitol Hill.

Such predictability is impossible without a common perception of risk and a shared vision of the future fleet.

As though all of these hurdles weren’t enough, the Navy’s shipbuilding budget is hamstrung by the need to recapitalize the nuclear ballistic missile submarine (Columbia-class) fleet and the decision to purchase a “block” of two Ford-class aircraft carriers.

For nearly a decade, Navy budget observers have sounded the alarm that the Columbia would punch a huge hole in the Navy’s budget when it shifted from development to procurement. The block buy of the Fords saved the Navy money but arguably exacerbated this problem by committing so much of the Navy’s shipbuilding budget up-front.

The Heart of the Matter

A series of decisions (and indecisions) decades in the making have backed the Navy into a budget and force-planning corner. Even if the Navy were to receive a larger share of the defense budget — which Herzinger and others suggest — there simply is no way to build a bigger fleet quickly, and any attempt to do so might burden the Navy with ships of limited utility in the long-term strategic competition with China.

While perhaps unsatisfying, the Navy’s 2022 budget request is a product of these constraints. It prioritizes the ballistic missile submarines, munitions, auxiliary ships, and mature combatant designs, and divests older or less-capable ships.

At the same time, the budget attempts to rebuild readiness (again) and invest in research and development to accelerate next-generation capabilities like unmanned surface and undersea vessels.

It doesn’t rapidly grow the fleet for the same reasons that no budget request has rapidly grown the fleet in decades: There is no widespread agreement on why the fleet should grow; or how it should grow; and the underlying ideas, designs, and infrastructure needed for rapid growth have all withered.

The problems facing the Navy weren’t created in a single budget, and they won’t be fixed in a single budget. To get the Navy out of its force-planning doldrums, the next National Defense Strategy should clarify its assessment of the China challenge and serve as a forcing function to create a shared vision of the future Navy.

The 2018 defense strategy tried to prioritize modernizing the Navy to deter future war with China over building near-term fleet capacity to supply ships to service geographic combatant command requests for forward forces.

This prioritization got lost in implementation, as “Dynamic Force Employment” became shorthand for running the Navy ragged with repeated deployments, often to tertiary theaters like U.S. Central Command.

A clear assessment of the China challenge and a shared vision for the future fleet would help improve the gap between strategy and implementation that plagued the 2018 strategy.

Perhaps more importantly, it would enable Navy and department leadership to work with, rather than against, Congress to undertake a long-term program to rebuild the Navy and reinvigorate the maritime industrial base on which the Navy and the nation depend.

Achieving consensus on this won’t be easy, as there are good reasons why China observers vary in their assessments of the risk of conflict and why U.S. naval and defense strategists differ on their visions of the future fleet.

However, without this consensus and a concerted effort to reverse decades of drift, the Navy will continue its gradual slide toward strategic bankruptcy, and the risk of its debts coming due suddenly (and perhaps violently) will increase.

Source: War on the Rocks

Comments:

GMC

US Ships on top of the water and thousands of miles away from the mainland are for show or for attacking defenseless countries.Subs are where it is – I’d say. Plus the US Navy is into the space scene and that will scarf up all the monies. Even at 1.5 Trillion bucks a year , the US Military isn’t satisfied – Greed rules.
.
I sense a cosmic event in the near future that the NWO is aware of – and they are preparing for it – They are preparing for – Not we are preparing for – big difference. Gut feeling .

Wilson Keep

The US has 800 military bases around the world, all need maintaining, all need McDonald’s vans and non-military operations funded out of the military budget. Policing an entire planet is very very expensive, and the US is running a massive budget deficit and its national debt is about to reach a critical tipping point. 

Compare that to Russia that has a military budget a tenth that of the USA but has no empire to police or maintain, most of the Russian money goes into military equipment & research. That is why the S400 and coming 500 missile defence systems make the US Patriot System look like a sling shot, and why it has hypersonic ICBMs, whilst the US is still failing or launch one successful hypersonic test missile. Add to that the USA’s failure to switch to their own service rockets for the ISS, humiliatingly still tethered to the Russians rockets who they are applying economic sanctions to. 

On top of this, you can add the strategic incompetence of the US spending $10 billion on huge aircraft carriers as the Chinese and Russians look-on with glee, at their new target practice opportunities. 

Then you realise that the US is slowly decaying as a military power. The worst thing that can happen now is that they engage in a serious war against a first world military, if they do, the whole edifice will be exposed for the knackered rust bucket it is.

Oilman

Reply to  Wilson Keep 
“Compare that to Russia that has a military budget a tenth that of the USA” … True but, for every dollar, the US spends on equipment, the Russian cost for the same stuff is around 0.15c 

ken

 “Some analysts believe that China poses an immediate threat.”

This is sort of like those covid con ‘experts’ telling us a 99.87% recovery rate is an immediate threat!

Here’s the skinny…. Remember all those production jobs? Remember all the products made in the USA? Remember nickel candy bars when the dollar had value?

Well, your selected parasites allowed the corporations to give all your jobs and production to the Chinese for more profits. Didn’t bother gov at first,,, they could just borrow (print) more currency to offset their losses.

You however went from a manufacturing economy to a service economy basically mowing each others lawns and maxing out credit cards.

All the while the Chinese were getting better and better at manufacturing. The produce some of the finest equipment in the world now. While their ‘knowhow’ was increasing the USA ‘knowhow’ was crashing. The last productive generation is retiring and dying out leaving behind younger generations of unskilled and uneducated Americans on the dole.

Bottom line,,, your government and its corporations is the cause of your poverty and is the cause of China’s advancement. You were sold out….

When you read about trade deficits you don’t hear that it is entirely caused by American corporations importing goods they produce in China.

Because we are no longer a manufacturing nation we can no longer afford the huge military nor do we have the expertise to maintain older equipment or design new equipment.

Don’t blame China,,, they took the ball Washington gave them and ran with it. So the ones to blame are the thieving bastards in government and corporations.

Raptar Driver

Navy’s are obsolete!

Oilman

In the past 25 years, the US spent huge amounts on trying to keep its air superiority while Russia and China were spending money to take away that superiority and Navy one by developing missiles to destroy them both and from a long and safe distance away.

Today, if a war broke out between the US and China, to repeat what RAND already stated, “the US would get their asses handed to them”.

The US dominance is over and they know it. The only thing that keeps them alive today is the dollar as a world currency. Saying that, with countries slowly getting rid of their dollars, it will come a time where it will become worthless hence replaced with either the Euro or the Chinese Yuan.

No empire lives forever. The US is falling and it’s because of their greed and bought and paid for politicians by big corporations. Same old story, same old result.

mijj

maintaining international military thuggery is expensive.

Ultrafart the Brave

There’s clearly something irrational about a country which is so addicted to its Navy’s ability to harass countries on the other side of the world, that it’s seemingly determined to bankrupt itself to continue doing so.

Some sort of a wakeup call might be needed to help them reassess their priorities.

A rude awakening, so to speak.

Dale F

Why not spend the money on America’s Infrastructure and make peace and not war with China and Russia?

edwardi

The author makes the same faulty assumptions as does the Naval planners, all that force projection onto other countries to attack them (at home or in their waters and shores), are futile, stupid and Imperialistic. And so will never happen.

Not to mention that game is over, period. 

The new missile technology has made surface ships irrelevant except for transportation in a non combat environment. 

China just test fired one of the new super fast ship killers from an airplane, thus extending it’s range of self defense to not the previous 1400 kilometers, 900 miles, but a much longer range now of 2,500 MILES. 

Game over. 

The US needs to focus on defense of it’s shores, and it’s only real remaining asset, submarines. 

The newly formed alliance/partnership of Russia/China is another game changer quickly improving all Chinese systems, the US is at least 10 years behind now, and that is assuming Russia stands still for 10 years, which won’t happen. 

It is game over, for Imperialism, time to bring our militaries home from everywhere and tell Uncle Sam to Please Shut His Trap ( his big mouth ) .

The problem with the US is the lack of intelligence in their political caste. In dumbimg down their own population, they’ve infected themselves with the same injudicious lethargic thought process. 

The US is never going to rival China, nor Russia, nor contain them nor be superior to them, militarily or otherwise. 

Their incoherent and disjointed thinking of being exceptional or indispensable has led to their moral and financal bankruptcy and unless they hastily beat a worldwide retreat from all their military bases and their illegal psychopathic war-mongering, they’ll face a total and excruciatingly humiliating collapse into ignominy

And there you have it…

As I said earlier, the neocons want to fight a war on Chinese soil and they want it BIG. And somehow they believe that it will be an “Afghanistan on steroids”, where a long remote war can be fought, they will get rich in the process, and the American people won’t know any better. They believe that the next war will be like all the last wars of the last one hundred years… fought far away, on American terms.

No.

It won’t be like that.

And everyone is trying to breech those high walls of the Ivory Towers that these morons live in on K-street. But they just aren’t listening. In their minds, the ARE the Powers-that-be, and they can do anything they want and no one will stop them. But bits and pieces, chunks and knocking can be heard on the walls of this “tower”, and so, we have articles like this coming about…

[2] Russian General Concludes China May Have More Nukes Than America And They Could Reach The US In Less Than One Hour!

I would say within five minutes from a SLBM launched MIRV. - MM

Fiona Cunningham is to be commended for her report “Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications Systems of the People’s Republic of China” (Nautilus July 18, 2019).

Ms. Cunningham relies on unclassified sources to provide a well-researched summary of the mainstream view of academics, China scholars and even many military professionals of the PRC’s nuclear doctrine and C3 arrangements.

Unfortunately, this show that the mainstream [media and neocon view] is almost certainly wrong.

Western analysts consistently fail to understand that, for both Beijing and Moscow, nuclear war plans and C3 to execute those plans are national security “crown jewels” . Important aspects that they protect and try to conceal behind a bodyguard of lies and disinformation.

Trusting open sources and commentary — especially when they are intended to cast nuclear doctrine and C3 in the most benign possible way — is a BIG mistake.

For example, during the Cold War the USSR went to extraordinary lengths to disinform Western policymakers and the public that Moscow had a nuclear “No First Use” doctrine. This was intended to conceal their real nuclear war plans — that we now know entailed a massive nuclear first strike early in a conflict. The NFU disinformation campaign was also intended to mobilize Western anti-nuclear activists, in and out of government, to constrain U.S. nuclear programs and operational plans.

NFU = Nuclear First Use Doctrine

China’s alleged nuclear NFU doctrine, like the USSR’s during the Cold War, is almost certainly disinformation.

NFU for China does not withstand the test of common sense.

No conservative military planner would adopt NFU when, as Ms. Cunningham correctly observes, China lacks BMEWS and satellite early warning systems that would enable China to launch on tactical warning.

NFU would doom China’s nuclear deterrent to certain destruction by a U.S. or Russian conventional or nuclear first strike, or to a nuclear first strike by India.

China’s nuclear posture, especially the lack of early warning radars and satellites, is “use it or lose it” which logically should drive PRC military planners toward nuclear first use — indeed toward surprise first use early in a crisis or conflict, based on strategic warning.

To put it another way. China is set up strategically. 

The defense weapons are set up so that when it appears that a war with a major power is involved (the United States), China will go NFU. Simply because they are not investing any technology for detection of incoming missile attacks.

Thus they have a policy of simultaneous use of nuclear and conventional weapons to defend against aggression.

Regardless of the PRC’s declaratory NFU policy, it strains credulity Beijing’s political leaders would adhere to NFU if confronted with compelling political and military intelligence of an imminent U.S. attack.

Such strategic warning was the basis for the former USSR’s secret plans for a disarming nuclear first strike under their VRYAN (Surprise Nuclear Missile Attack) intelligence program, that nearly resulted in a nuclear apocalypse during NATO’s theater nuclear exercise ABLE ARCHER-83.

Just as Ms. Cunningham’s report would have benefited from greater skepticism about NFU, greater humility about what we know, and don’t know, about China’s nuclear posture is also advisable.

• For example, how do we really know that China’s nuclear warheads are in storage, not mounted on missiles?

This would be a very grave vulnerability. China’s ICBMs and IRBMs are in cold launch canisters — we cannot see if they are armed, or not.

Ms. Cunningham seriously proposes that China gives such high priority to safeguarding against unauthorized nuclear use that their very costly ballistic missile submarine fleet may, in peacetime, carry no SLBMs.

• All of the Chinese boomer subs are empty of SLBM’s? Really?

Perhaps she means they would carry no SLBM nuclear warheads. In either case, this defies common sense as it would render useless China’s SSBN fleet as a deterrent against surprise attack.

The SSBNs would also become an escalatory liability in a crisis or conflict, as the process of uploading missiles or warheads would be very lengthy, highly visible, and so provocative as to invite a disarming first strike.

Undoubtedly, China will operate its SSBNs in peacetime as they are being tested now — loaded for bear, with SLBMs armed with nuclear warheads aboard.

• For decades, Western analysts have almost certainly grossly underestimated China’s number of nuclear weapons as about 300 (compared to about 1,500 operational strategic nuclear weapons for the U.S. and Russia, or five times as many). This seems based more on wishful thinking than a realistic appraisal of China’s nuclear capabilities.

Russian Gen. Viktor Yesin, former commander in chief of the Strategic Rocket Forces, provided a more realistic estimate of China’s nuclear capabilities in an article published seven years ago “Third After the United States and Russia: On China’s Nuclear Capabilities Without Understatement or Exaggeration” (April 30, 2012).

Gen. Yesin calculates China could have “10,000 nuclear munitions” based on the PRC’s estimated production of “up to 40 tons of weapons uranium” and “about 10 tons of weapons-grade plutonium” manufactured “as of 2011.”

However, based on China’s strategic and tactical delivery systems, Gen. Yesin concludes “there may be up to 1,800 warheads in China’s nuclear arsenal.”

Contrary to the title of Gen. Yesin’s article, this would make China, with 1,800 strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, the second most heavily armed nuclear power, after Russia (3,500 operational strategic and tactical nuclear weapons) but before the U.S. (1,700 strategic and tactical nuclear weapons).

“China’s nuclear capabilities are clearly underestimated…

significantly higher than commonly believed in the Western expert community,”

- concludes Russian Gen. Yesin.

As the New Cold War heats up in the Pacific — the United States had better not bet its security on China’s “No First Use” pledge and a presumed five-to-one U.S. advantage in nuclear weapons.

This story was originally published here. Dr. Peter Vincent Pry served as chief of staff of the congressional EMP Commission and in the CIA. 

Well some sanity…

I have to agree. All the assumptions made by American planners are really ignorant. Ignorant of the facts, ignorant of China, ignorant of history, ignorant of Intel, ignorant of American weapons capability, and shrouded in wishful thinking, greed, psychopathic personalities, visions of grandeur and illusions.

So maybe some of this is starting to filter out to the American mindless masses…

The following article [3] discusses neocon war-mongering religious nutcase Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton and his slow realization that maybe now is not the time to fight China….

…yeah, Ya don’t think?

He is being discussed on FOX News which is the Alt-Right conservative “news” media that spouts the government point of view  to appeal to American conservatives.

[3] US Senator Cotton Casts Doubt on US Navy’s Ability to ‘Fight and Defeat’ China

© REUTERS / OCTAVIO JONES

by Daria Bedenko – https://sputniknews.com/us/202107141083380272-us-senator-cotton-casts-doubt-on-us-navys-ability-to-fight-and-defeat-china/

The US military has seen criticism from lawmakers in the recent past: for example, Republican Senator Ted Cruz happened to share a video comparing the American army and the Russian Army, suggesting that the American military is “woke” and “emasculated”.

Republican US Senator Tom Cotton in a Tuesday interview to Fox News voiced doubt about whether the US Navy is capable of defeating China in battle, pointing at how the American military has, in his opinion, shifted away from warfighting.

"Obviously, the Navy has a big and complex task, but the single most important thing we have our surface Navy for is to be ready to fight and defeat the Chinese Navy",

Cotton said.

"And right now, I have real problems -- real doubts – the Navy has instilled the kind of warfighting mentality that would allow us to accomplish that goal."

He also referred to a recent military report delivered to members of Congress that, according to Cotton’s earlier statement,

"found that a staggering 94% of sailors interviewed believe that the surface Navy suffers from a crisis of leadership and culture."

"It's coming from sailors, it's coming from the sailors and their chiefs and their junior officers, and in some cases, commanding officers who have lost confidence that the Navy's surface warfare component is ready to fight and win tonight",

Cotton told Fox News.

The senator asserted that the United States

"allowed China to steal a march on us that relates especially shipbuilding",

pointing at a

"massive shipbuilding campaign"

by Beijing and suggesting that Washington should follow their lead. He also said that changes are needed in the way sailors and officers are trained, noting that, according to the military report,

"in some cases" the soldiers are handed DVDs to watch in their spare time to train."

"We would never do that to a Navy aviator, we would never do it to a Navy nuclear engineer", Cotton argued. "We shouldn't be doing it to our surface warfare officers either. They deserve a lot better, and the sailors they lead deserve a lot better as well."

The delivery of “A Report on the Fighting Culture of the United States Navy’s Surface Fleet” was ordered by Cotton and some of his House counterparts, including GOP Representatives Jim Banks, Dan Crenshaw, and Mike Gallagher.

This is not the first time Republican lawmakers have questioned the readiness of the American military, the world’s largest by a significant margin. Many conservatives blast the US military for being “woke” and “emasculated”, particularly Texas GOP Senator Ted Cruz, who shared a video in which he compared the US military with the Russian army.

Some observers have criticized the American military for their rollout of so-called ‘woke’ ad videos or offering Zodiac horoscopes for soldiers, arguing that the focus should be on professionalism and not sexual orientation, gender, race, or even astrological aspects.

The sentiment, however, does not appear to be shared by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who noted in late May that he would not “lose one minute of sleep” over what Russia or China say about the US military, which he deemed “the best” in the world today.

Comments

Sy.Gunson.NZ

It is time China established a naval base in Cuba. Then the Americans will retreat from the South China Sea

Sy.Gunson.NZ

China sent one warship to the Coral Sea, then the Australian navy scurried back from the South China Sea

4Justice

So, a trillion dollar per year "defense" budget and hundreds of military bases around the globe aren't enough. Interesting how Russia and China, who spend 10 times less and have only a few external bases between them scare the US so much. They not only defend their countries adequately, but are also major threats offensively for 10 times less than what the US spends. I suppose the US answer to this will be to increase spending and build more bases.

NthrnNYker59

China's ships FAR outnumber fascist amerika's total number of ships that span all 7 seas....there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY the fascists can compete versus China in a regional battle or even war.

pepa in reply toSy.Gunson.NZ

@Sy.Gunson.NZ, 

I'm afraid he's only saying this in a drive to increase the navy budget...

Erikao

Translation we want more money. Oh and Mr. Austin since you are so confident wouldn't that mean that these countries do not actually pose a threat and we can stop bullying them?

Terranian

That's what ALL Pentagon simulations + assessments etc. say....but the total demented fascist psychopathic Neocons give a *F*, they would rather scorch the earth than giving up their lunatic wet dream...the result of their 'American Exceptionalism' Braindamages + Delusions of Grandeur and they are keeping on looting robbing plundering the taxpayer country + society blind.

Sy.Gunson.NZ

Truth is, that China has no real interest in fighting anybody, unless provoked. Watching USA hype itself up for war is like watching a kitten chasing its own tail

OUTLANDER1968

Major General Smedley Butler told the Senate Arms Committee in 1935 - that - WAR IS A RACKET. And saying - what Al Capon was trying to do in 3 districts in Chicago - He was doing it on 3 continents (Asia, Africa, and South America, plus Mexico) - for the western mafia corporations. And it hasn't change. 

Check out the movie - The Pentagon Wars. 

Plus the latest report from the U.S Air Force regarding the F-35 joint fighter jet: The F-35 $1.7 trillion project has failed to meet expectations. And lets not forget about the 911 BS event, when the Senate Arms Committee was investigating the Pentagon for misplacing $2.3 trillion in 1999 and $1.1 trillion in 2000, and interesting that The ARMY/NAVY Financial Analyst Office was the office destroyed on that day, just like World Trade Center Building #7. ------ Pull My Finger, cause it speaks the same BS language.

Sy.Gunson.NZ

CHINA is building a base on the Moon. soon USA will have to retreat from space too

KOURSK

it is sure that the big mafia and its NATO dependencies lose ground geostrategically *** 

it is excellent news if the billionaires who reign in Washington and Brussels can no longer impose their particular interests on the whole of the planet *** 

the rise of states and the Russian and Chinese public sphere, geostrategically and economically is not conquering *** 

it simply allows cooperation and development to countries which were subject to plunder when they were under the yoke of organized crime in Washington and Brussels *** 

Russia and china bring peace

Terranianin reply toSy.Gunson.NZ

@Sy.Gunson.NZ, 

Russia will join them as well, as on their Space Station because the ISS reach their End-Of-Life...

and in contrast to the US who blocked + excluded them from the ISS against the wishes of their partners, the Chinese welcome anyone to join them in cooperation as 'equals'. 

It's like with their ginormous FAST telescope, they literally invited scientist from all over the world and the US let their Arecibo telescope rot and decay and collapse because of neglect and ignorance.

keyboardcosmetics

It is ludicrous to even think that a mixed-race impoverished United States routed by Afghan tribesmen with rifles could offer any kind of threat other than bluster at a powerful armed to the teeth modern nation with a population at least 6 times greater than that of the US. What are those mulattos on?

BUY HUAWEI

hahhaha, the best in the world today? Defeated by Taliban with slingshot,

kohems

America. Military best in the world? Even the Taliban have defeated it and lost to the Vietnamese ragtag army. America can never defeat China or Russia in any war and they know that. The world will never support America and its allies in any with China or Russia.

mandrake

Sure, the morons been living in a bubble believing they are invincible, which they are not. 

First lesson they have failed to learn from is that wars fought in far away places against indigenous people are unwinnable. 

China would be such far away theater and they just wouldn’t stand a chance!

richard1950

After all its failed wars in the MiddleEast, and now being kicked out of Afghanistan, the Cowboys are now thinking of trying another war. 

This time they want to start a war in Asia, taking on the Chinese in their own backyard. 

Are these Cowboys nuts?

Hugo Boss

Don't you know that the Cabal is playing both sides: weakening the US and strengthening China, so that both may destroy each other and the Tribe rules?

Some Chinese Military Videos

I really do not know how much this can contribute tot he discussion, but I don’t think that it will hurt. Here’s some videos of Chinese military weapons and systems. I hope that they are interesting to you.

Download the video HERE.

And this one…

And the video HERE.

And this one…

And the video HERE.

And this video…

And the video HERE.

And here…

And the video HERE.

Conclusion

With every conceivable step pushing for war in place, it appears that the United States is starting to fall back and regain some sensibility.

It appears.

And I hope that it is true.

But if there is one thing that I do know, is that as nuts and crazy as the United States leadership are, they are crafty.

Crafty. Sneaky, Astute. Powerful. Dangerous.

And as an American I DO NOT TRUST THEM ONE BIT.

While it appears that the USA is pulling back from the brink of World War III, it just might just be another illusion. And instead, we could easily see a…

*** SNAP ***

And the entire world is engulfed in nuclear, flames, the worst biological weapons, and war on all theaters and in every conceivable way.

So…

Do not let your guard down.

Keep up on your affirmation prayers, and remain guarded and vigilant.

Final Thoughts

Keep in mind that America is a Police State domestically. A Military Empire Internationally. It’s government is an Oligarchy, and it’s people are dumbed down serf-slaves (roughly 60% serf / 25% felon slaves). The government controls everything inside of America, and wants to extend that reach internationally. This will not disappear, no matter what it appears to be.

America is not the leadership. There are good people, capable people, and still intact systems that are capable of designing, working and building things. The only problem is that the government is so big, is so enormous, that it controls everything, and makes it difficult to get anything done, and impossible to enact change.

America is changing, and the military forces are wearing new uniforms and new systems. They are being prepared to fight a major war. No matter what you read otherwise.

America has new weapons systems too. And is developing more every day, and they do look impressive.

So with all this in mind, please take what ever you read in the American “news” cautiously. Be wary.

History has shown that the United States government lies, and is deceptive, and never moves away from it’s voracious appetite for power, control and domination. Never let up our guard.

And by the way, keep in mind that the American people are being manipulated and led by these psychopaths to behave in fearful and dangerous ways.

Check out this American woman, in Hong Kong of all places, yelling at a Chinese man. Telling him to get back to China “where you belong”. And he replies “You’re in China (now)”.

Full video HERE.

Do you want more?

You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.

.

Articles & Links

.

• You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
• You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
• You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
• You can find out more about the author HERE.
• If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
• If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.

For those of you who are unaware, the k-street neocons (in Washington DC) have been promoting a war with China for over four years now. They started with [1] a war over “democracy” in Hong Kong, and when that failed, they started [2] with a war over Tibet with India, and when that failed, they started [3] with a war over the Uighur Muslims though Afghanistan, and that failed as well. The last group of beating drums has been [4] a war over Taiwan.

“Leaked” nonsense articles discussing Chinese plans to invade Taiwan are all over the Western press. Of course, if you go to the source of this Intel, you will see a glossy supermarket tabloid devoid of facts. Never the less, the drum beats have been a booming. And the neocons in Washington has even started laying out “tweets” using official Whitehouse websites…

…and Biden put a complete end to all this immediately.

Have you noticed how all the “fire hose” of media against China regarding Taiwan has ended? When was the last time you saw an article promoting American involvement in a war over Taiwan?

Why is this?

This is why…

Yup. This goes 100% against everything that Mike Pompeo and the rest of that ghoulish neocon cabal are saying.

What’s Next?

Well, the Morrison regime is still pushing for a war with China. Maybe they will try to perform amphibious landings on the coast of Shenzhen. Who knows? These people are that “bat shit crazy”!

This is a short article, but the content is significant.

America will stand down, and not get involved with any conflict over Taiwan. All those folk who are promoting war, more military spending and all other factors regarding a war with China over Taiwan has got their “wings clipped”.

Notice how none of this is being reported in any American “news”. The only way that you can tell that anything is going on is the lack of coverage regarding Taiwan.

Do you want more?

You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.

.

Articles & Links

.

• You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
• You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
• You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
• You can find out more about the author HERE.
• If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
• If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.