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

Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 173 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#121

Post by smallstepforman »

Simon321 wrote: post #86
smallstepforman wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I must make the assumption that you’re young. China today has set its path to carry out an action in 5-10 years when it’s ready. You never engage when you’re not prepared. You build up, plan, prepare, then act. That takes time. Remember, revenge is best served cold. China has stepped down today, but I can reassure you, in 5-10 years it will act militarily to avenge its current embarrasment. Just like Russia prepared…

> Russia won the war in the first 72 hours. Russia has also only committed 10% of their resources, the rest are on standby in case NATO intervenes. Imagine the mental gymnastics you have to do to believe this. Some sources: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-14/russia-tu... > There are indications the Kremlin is running out of troops for its war with Ukraine. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-6249690…

I wouldn’t call those links reliable sources, more like “imaginative projection”. Remember when NATO bombed little Serbia for 79 days and engaged in a media blitz with mindboggling projection of Serbian army loses, only to discover after Kumanovo agreement that only 13 (in words, thirteen) armoured vehicles were actually hit. Generals openly stated afterwards they were lucky not to commit ground forces based on these projections since the opponents strength was not diminished. Serbia only surrendered when NATO started hitting power stations, water facilities, food factories and realised the NATO lunacy wasn’t going to stop on its own, sending Serbia to the stone age.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#122

Post by Mikeb85 »

smallstepforman wrote: post #66
atemerev wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the world is now more unipolar than ever before. Russia is repeatedly proving that it worth nearly nothing both in military and political sense, the Chinese military power is also very much overestimated. EU is nearly defenseless on their own too. Only the US has the military power to win any existential war (small wars of course can still be “lost”, as the adversary can become the prize not worth taking…

I must make the assumption that you’re young. China today has set its path to carry out an action in 5-10 years when it’s ready. You never engage when you’re not prepared. You build up, plan, prepare, then act. That takes time. Remember, revenge is best served cold. China has stepped down today, but I can reassure you, in 5-10 years it will act militarily to avenge its current embarrasment. Just like Russia prepared…

> Russia won the war in the first 72 hours,

This is a hilariously bad take considering they attempted to take Kyiv in the first 72 hours and now they're grinding for minimal gains in the south while losing most of their modern equipment and taking heavy losses.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#123

Post by actionfromafar »

squarefoot wrote: post #98
simmerup wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with war is that you lose control of the situation extremely fast. Whether the countries want to go to war doesn’t matter when a bluff that isn’t a bluff is called.

Being sure that nobody else would intervene directly in Ukraine is why the Russians could do on a nationwide scale what nobody thought they would do: bombing every building civilian homes, malls, schools and hospitals is unheard of, at least when done on purpose and on a such large scale. What i find disgusting is that we're slowly adapting to it, and the Russians know that. However, it is possible that if China inva…

The firebombing of Dresden was done on purpose.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#124

Post by actionfromafar »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #100
okaram wrote: post #52

> China preparing to invade Taiwan ... There is, as of now, no evidence China is preparing to invade anything. There's always sable rattling, hasn't happened yet. > Wars happen when two or nation's drive for self-preservation collide That's a naive view of war, which ignores individual a-holes. There's no self-preservation in Russia invading Ukraine... I understand it's easy to despair and fear seeing some of the thi…

>That's a naive view of war, which ignores individual a-holes. There's no self-preservation in Russia invading Ukraine... Russia was massively clear during the pre-invasion buildup that it was about Ukrainian NATO aspirations. They offered to deescalate and remove troops from the boarder if US declared opposition to Ukrainian admission. They publicly stated they saw it as an existential threat and were willing to inv…

I agree to it being an existential threat - to Moscow and the Kremlin.

(Which is what matters.)

A prospering, west-oriented, large and largely Russophone country on their borders would be a terrible reminder for both populations what a massive failure the Russian state is.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#127

Post by Mikeb85 »

Yes, it's inevitable. Russia can't lose to Ukraine so they'll pick a fight with the West. China needs Taiwan and is betting that the West won't stop them. The West not directly intervening in Russia/Ukraine signals weakness and every dictatorial government is making moves right now...

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#128

Post by Balgair »

Yes, and by 2030 [0] between China and the US/NATO-aligned

To compete in the first half of the 21st century, China must solve two issues: 1) Oil 2) Semiconductors.

1) China's domestic supply is woeful and they already import nearly half their oil. They are then constrained by the Straits of Malacca and all the myriad other channels into the South China Sea. NATO-aligned countries border much of that area and have very good strategic situations already. NATO-aligned countries and the US can effectively close off these routes at a moment's notice. Their only other option is pipelines through Xiangang and the Uyghurs to the oilfields of the Caspian. Both areas are under heavy development by China currently.

2) 1.5nm chips are another form of constrained resources, especially in the 21st century. Nearly every one is made in Taiwan. And nearly every chip fab is intentionally near the best landing sites during a potential invasion[1]. If Taiwan and NATO-aligned countries want to shut off or decrease the supply of the latest generation of chips to China, they can do so at a moment's notice. Imagine the chip issues we currently have with Ford and GM, but over the entire economy of China. It would hurt China quite a lot and the foreign source of chips is an outstanding issue for China's security, as Javelins have proved in Ukraine.

China must solve these issues by 2030 at the latest. If they do not, then they allow for the NATO sphere to completely run away in capturing these two critical resources of the 21st century. Very recently, the US was allowed to produce to last generation 3nm chip fabs in Texas, a giant issue for China. The window for China to compete with the NATO-sphere is quickly closing [2]. If China does not act fast to secure the 1.5nm chip fabs in Taiwan and solve it's oil fragility, it will forever be at the mercy of the NATO-sphere.

[0] Dear God, I hope I'm wrong

[1] And, no, you can't just spin up a fab in a few years. They are extraordinarily tricky things to create and there are literal decades of closely kept trade/national-security secrets that the Taiwanese have.

[2] I would say it has already closed, as Ukraine has demonstrated with Russia

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#129

Post by sph »

csomar wrote: post #92
sph wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Before 2010 the world was quite multi-polar with the US being the leader. Now, we are moving to a uni-polar world Don't you mean the opposite? It was unipolar since the end of WW2, with US being the top superpower. Now other countries want, and can get, a piece of the pie. To be fair that means pretty much only China.

No. After the end of WW2, the US was the "obvious" leader but not the actual leader. European countries were still the leader of the colonized countries, China/Japan/SouthAmerica were figuring things on their own, the EU united, some arab countries wanted to influence/control oil, Russia was planting communism around the world, etc... In fact, the US was not much at that time. It had power but little influence. Think…

Sorry, I still don't get it. Forget WW2, you said the US became the leader in 2010. I argue it has been the only superpower with worldwide economic and military reach before that date, if not since the end of WW2. Also, why 2010? If you're referring to the economic crisis, I can't see the US position in the world stage being affected post-2008.

You also say EU was another leader, but Europe is a superpower that has always been under the American wing since the end of the war. If US said "jump", Europe has been asking "how high" since 1945. They're best pals, but only one of them actually calls the shot.

But the point isn't Europe. It's that US has been the big boss for the entire post-war era, Soviet Russia tried to establish itself but failed and declined, now China has been having much more success than USSR ever did, but they are not looking to play second fiddle, hence this talk about WW3.

Re: Ask HN: Is WWIII already in its early stages?

#130

Post by ryandrake »

mrtksn wrote: post #113
philwelch wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very interesting and unusual take, pretty much the exact opposite of what I usually see.

It's just the Russian narrative. A popular take in the countries where the Russian influence is strong. AKA the sneaky West cornered Russia and was about to strike Moscow and that's why Putin had to start a special operation in Ukraine and push NATO away from its borders.

The thing I've never understood about that propaganda is: What does Russia have that the USA wants? More land? USA has plenty of land, much of it totally unused and unpopulated. Oil? USA now exports it. More rivers? Ports? Developed cities? No, no, and no. The USA has nothing to gain by invading and occupying Russia. Sorry to my Russian friends, but the country is kind of small-potatoes economically, as well. What does the propaganda say that the USA wants?
Post reply on HN