Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 538 posts

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#471

Post by justicezyx »

blkhp19 wrote: post #415
justicezyx wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It wasn't part of China HK was sold to Britain as part of the corrupted and weak China's humiliation. What do you want to say? Are you trying to depict the image that HK has been forcefully claimed by China? Please stop this type of propaganda behavior. I don't like CCP, but that does not make HK not part of China. We Chinese eventually will get rid of CCP, but we don't want the great nation get split. Just like an…

Who cares what it was / wasn't part of. The majority of people in HK don't want to be part of China. That's all that matters. > We Chinese eventually will get rid of CCP, but we don't want the great nation get split. Dude, what? HK hasn't been part of China for years. What possible justification could you have for re-integrating it. This isn't about preventing a split, this is about undoing a split, and destroying a…

> The majority of people in HK don't want to be part of China.

Where is your evidence?

I have friends live and working in HK. Certainly the silent majority doesn't care much. Like any normal people, they prefer better life and rewarding career, than being full time protester.

The 2016 US election already showed that the silent majority rarely aligned with the mainstream rhetoric.

Please be mindful about the reality.

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#472

Post by nmfisher »

belter wrote: post #443
JackeJR wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some think that if the US extended their protection to Taiwan, Beijing would not attempt to take Taiwan. Let's just assume for a moment that the US will fight off attacks by China to take Taiwan. And that US successfully ward off an attack. What next? What is there to prevent China from trying again and again and again? Will the US be prepared to ward off attacks after attacks after attacks? This is unlikely to happe…

From a tactical point a view it looks a minor issue, except of course for the people of Taiwan. I cannot imagine what somebody in Taiwan, born and raised in a democracy, might be thinking when looking at what is happening in Hong Kong From the Strategic point of view, you have to look at a map to see what that would mean. China would take over Taiwan, and immediately expand its sea island building around its borders.…

I don't know where this absurd idea came from that "China invading Taiwan" means "Australia/Japan would be next!".

As far as the PRC is concerned, Taiwan is a part of China. They wouldn't be invading another nations, they would simply be reclaiming sovereignty over a renegade province.

That is something entirely different from invading a Western ally. One thing has absolutely no bearing on the other.

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#473

Post by justicezyx »

Haga wrote: post #383
justicezyx wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It wasn't part of China HK was sold to Britain as part of the corrupted and weak China's humiliation. What do you want to say? Are you trying to depict the image that HK has been forcefully claimed by China? Please stop this type of propaganda behavior. I don't like CCP, but that does not make HK not part of China. We Chinese eventually will get rid of CCP, but we don't want the great nation get split. Just like an…

This "great" nation was built on the corpse of several smaller nations a d ethnic groups. Theire reservations are a Disneyland of death by funny dances and deserve to be protected?

This great nation was not built on the corpse of smaller nation.

Since the Zhou dynasty, which derived from tribal era, China was already a unified entity. The process of creating Zhou was certainly not involving any other nations.

Qin dynasty, China have already been a unified country, under unified laws, economic rules, and mixed culture. With a great deal of characteristics of modern nations.

Qin's unification process is standard warfare between feudal lords. Very much like what happened in the long history of Europe.

Once China was unified this way. The cycle of division and unification have never ceased.

Your statement is at best inaccurate. At worst just random imagination.

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#474

Post by blagie »

dragontamer wrote: post #450
dTal wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carriers are already obsolete in a superpower war. Both sides possess weapons that can destroy them utterly from a great distance, and their location cannot be kept secret. Carriers won't last a day.

China's hypersonic missiles have shorter range than an F35 launched from a carrier with midair refuel drone. The only issue is that we'd want our carriers closer in practice. Close to the action means faster response times. If we are willing to destroy Chinese satellites, then China's kill chain becomes much harder. I'm not convinced that a drone or spyplane can reliably penetrate the defensive line of destroyers + c…

A drone could not penetrate a defensive line of destroyers, cruisers, and E2 Hawkeyes.

However, a destroyer costs $870 million. I can build a drone for around $870 which has decent range, and sufficient firepower to do real damage if attacking with sufficient precision (e.g. placing a small explosive charge directly within a barrel).

That means I can launch a million drones for the cost of one destroyer. I'm pretty sure that a line of destroyers, cruisers, and E2 Hawkeyes wouldn't be able to destroy a fleet of a million drones. If they could, the cost of destroying each drone would likely be greater than the cost of the drone.

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#475

Post by dragontamer »

blagie wrote: post #474
dragontamer wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China's hypersonic missiles have shorter range than an F35 launched from a carrier with midair refuel drone. The only issue is that we'd want our carriers closer in practice. Close to the action means faster response times. If we are willing to destroy Chinese satellites, then China's kill chain becomes much harder. I'm not convinced that a drone or spyplane can reliably penetrate the defensive line of destroyers + c…

A drone could not penetrate a defensive line of destroyers, cruisers, and E2 Hawkeyes. However, a destroyer costs $870 million. I can build a drone for around $870 which has decent range, and sufficient firepower to do real damage if attacking with sufficient precision (e.g. placing a small explosive charge directly within a barrel). That means I can launch a million drones for the cost of one destroyer. I'm pretty s…

CRAM bullets cost cheaper than your drone, and those CRAMs are on each Destroyer. I think our cruisers have 2 CRAMs on them (but I forget exactly)

These CRAMs can aim-bot and destroy subsonic cruise missiles (500mph), and even supersonic cruise missiles (1000mph). That's why China has spent billions developing hypersonic missiles (2500+mph) to dodge our CRAMs and missile defenses.

How fast is your drone flying? Does it pull enough lateral Gs to dodge CRAM shots or avoid the Patriot defense missiles?

--------

https://youtu.be/0bmSCC823tM?t=205

The "city-version" has shorter range, because we need the bullets to self-destroy themselves before they land on someone's property. So the Israeli "Iron Dome" is in fact, inferior, to the defense system on these Destroyers / Cruisers that surround the Carrier.

Tel Aviv's Iron Dome also has a much more difficult job: defending a population center rather than just a few ships. There will naturally be "holes" in the Iron Dome (just areas of the city that aren't as well defended).

In contrast: we can position our ships to maximize the chance of interception, and minimize the chance of our CRAM's failing.

-----------------

The worry about China's drones is their stealth spydrones which will try to triangulate the position of the carrier strike group. The drone then sends the coordinates to a hypersonic missile.

I'm not convinced that the stealth systems on those drones are sufficient to "hide" from radar, probably only good enough to prevent things like CRAM/Patriots from locking on. Without the ability to lock on, we don't have an ability to kill those drones from Destroyers / Cruisers.

That's where the Carrier comes in. The E2 Hawkeye has an aerial radar system and can get "eyes in the sky", making our targeting superior (maybe then our Patriots can hit). We can also launch fighters (F22 is probably sufficient) to close the distance and lock on / destroy the target... or even engage in a dogfight (radar-drones wouldn't have much dogfighting ability).

--------

How is China launching a million drones anyway? Their carriers aren't like ours. We have 4x catapults and 2x runways per carrier, I'm pretty sure China's carriers are only 1x runway. How many minutes does it take per launch?

If its an air battle you want, the 4x catapults + 2x runways the Supercarriers push will get more planes into the air than anything in the Chinese Navy... and we have something like 10 carriers fielded right now.

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#476

Post by goatsi »

sudosysgen wrote: post #461
goatsi wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>China is the only country in the world that produces everything it needs for daily operations, without a single exception, in one way or another. Tell me what I'm missing about their domestic oil industry then, because everything else I'm reading tells me they need to import around 10 million barrels of crude oil a day (primarily to produce gasoline and diesel, so it's very hard to substitute).

Indeed, they do. They still have the domestic capacity to expand internal production to cover most of those 10 million barrels. I didn't say they produce everything they need in sufficient quantities, just that they produce it. It would cause short term trouble and rationing but long term the impact is mitigated.

Looking at the most recent numbers, they produced just under 4 million barrels a day domestically. Oil production isn't something where you can just triple the output over a few months. China has been working to expand their internal production for a while, and it takes billions of dollars and years to do so: https://www.forbes.com/sites/edhirs/2019/06/06/china-is-bett...

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#477

Post by ranger207 »

tablespoon wrote: post #352
ranger207 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wargames are designed to be lost. It's not as useful to say "welp we stomped all over them" as it is to push the forces being tested further and further until they break, then fixing or compensating where it broke and pushing even further. Wargames aren't constrained by reality, and the game's opposing force may be more powerful than in reality. Just hearing that the US lost a wargame doesn't mean anything without kn…

> Wargames are designed to be lost. It's not as useful to say "welp we stomped all over them" as it is to push the forces being tested further and further until they break, then fixing or compensating where it broke and pushing even further. Wasn't there a pretty famous case, in a wargame meant to simulate conflict with Iran, where the red team general actually played to win but the game leaders reset things with new…

You're probably thinking of the 2002 Millennium Challenge. That was a wargame plus a training exercise, which complicates things. For example, there were real US Navy ships out in the Persian Gulf, but to avoid disrupting commercial traffic they were confined to a specific area. The OPFOR (opposing forces) commander knew the confines, so he didn't have to scout for BLUFOR (US forces), and BLUFOR couldn't maneuver to avoid him. For another example, BLUFOR was jamming and destroying all of OPFOR's communications, so OPFOR switched to motorcycle runners. Unfortunately the simulation software didn't exactly support motorcycle runners, so they moved just as fast as radio communications but were invulnerable to BLUFOR strikes.

BLUFOR kept getting revived because it was also a training exercise in addition to a wargame. You've got dozens of ships gathered in the area to practice formation maneuvering, underway replenishment, etc, under wartime conditions. If you're on a ship that's blown up on day 2 of 20, what are you supposed to do for the rest of the time? It's better for training to revive casualties.

Stuff like this is why it's not easy to trust the outcome of a wargame.

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#478

Post by justicezyx »

blkhp19 wrote: post #415
justicezyx wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It wasn't part of China HK was sold to Britain as part of the corrupted and weak China's humiliation. What do you want to say? Are you trying to depict the image that HK has been forcefully claimed by China? Please stop this type of propaganda behavior. I don't like CCP, but that does not make HK not part of China. We Chinese eventually will get rid of CCP, but we don't want the great nation get split. Just like an…

Who cares what it was / wasn't part of. The majority of people in HK don't want to be part of China. That's all that matters. > We Chinese eventually will get rid of CCP, but we don't want the great nation get split. Dude, what? HK hasn't been part of China for years. What possible justification could you have for re-integrating it. This isn't about preventing a split, this is about undoing a split, and destroying a…

> Dude, what? HK hasn't been part of China for years. What possible justification could you have for re-integrating it.

Dude, how ignorant can you be?

HK was returned to China because of the original treaty between Qing and Britain.

Integration? WTF? It's part of the country, how can it not be integrated. I am startled by these showing of ignorance and self grandizlsing...

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#479

Post by star-trek-fleet »

Dah00n wrote: post #435
Haga wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "great" nation was built on the corpse of several smaller nations a d ethnic groups. Theire reservations are a Disneyland of death by funny dances and deserve to be protected?

The same could be said of the US. I'd even go as far as saying it is historically worse in the US.

Well, no, China's unification was a cultural and ethnicity blanding. It was never a genocide.

First I already debunked the notion that China conquered small nations to form its heritage. No China got it's heritage long ago through tribal merger.

And the US history of founding is patently different, and vastly more brutal and immoral...

Re: Hong Kong: Police Raid Tiananmen Square Museum

#480

Post by andruby »

gogopuppygogo wrote: post #145
yodsanklai wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of effort China is putting to sabotage Taiwan independence is astonishing. I have Taiwanese relatives and I'm very worried for them.

The USA has been losing all war games where it defends Tawain against China. https://nypost.com/2021/03/11/us-war-games-over-china-threat... It is not okay to assume USA supremacy against adversaries anymore. Why Americans still do business with China is astounding to me.

I am a European and the idea that two superpowers would actually go to full-on war seems absurd. At least, I hope all sides agree that it is a terrible idea.

We haven't had full-on war between two sides that are "in the same league" since WW2. The cold war was tense, and there have been proxy wars, or wars between a super power and a tiny power.

When two sides are matched somewhat evenly, that's when the loss of life has been dramatic, as we've seen in both world wars.

I really hope I don't see a full on war between super powers in my or my children's lifetimes, because it would be brutal.

I mean, would we really see aircraft carriers and bombers in action? submarines? Will both sides blow up each other's satellites and create a Kessler syndrome? At which point do they start threatening with nukes?

No, I can imagine some power projection and rough play, but I don't think anyone is considering full-on war.

Post reply on HN