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

Untitled topic

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 95 posts

Re: undefined

#11

Post by ajuc »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #9
ajuc wrote: post #7

Ukraine makes WW3 less likely. If it was conquered quickly - that would make WW3 more likely (because Russia and China would estimate their chances of further conquest higher and would probably start something in Taiwan or Baltic states). Russia issued a statement just before 2022 invasion that demanded NATO back off from Baltic States, Poland, etc. If Ukraine fell quickly they could think they can force this by smal…

The fact that Russia's invasion of Ukraine mostly failed informs about the strength of Russia's military but says nothing about China's. If China is drawing conclusions they must be based on the West's reaction to the invasion, not on Russia's performance. China has been working on these scenarios well before Russia invaded Ukraine because, well, it is obvious that the West controls most of the world's economic and f…

China is using russian equipment (or equipment based on reverse-engineered russian equipment), russian tactics, and is training with Russia. Before 2022 it was generally agreed that in their joint exercises russian army looked better.

China has all the corruption problems Russia has, even less oversight and transparency, and fought no competetive wars in which it could be tested.

I expect much worse performance from them if they ever go to a real war.

As for decoupling economy - Russia is energy exporter. China is importing resources and energy and selling products to the west. They are much more coupled with the west than Russia, no matter who services the transactions.

Re: undefined

#12

Post by caeril »

keepamovin wrote: post #3
Justsignedup wrote: post #2

Not close. China can't afford it. They are mid economic ruin and can't afford a sustained conflict. Russia is almost out of ammo. Desperately trying to generate more. Suffering from a lot of brain drain. Middle easy is in fighting. There's no way they'd jump into such a war. Nobody wants to directly attack a nato country. who else would be involved?

I'm not saying they are, but if China is mid economic ruin, that might actually be a reason for them to favor conflict. War is often about the spoils, and historically has been used to bolster state coffers in the face of mismanagement, failure or shoddy tax collection. I'm not sure a failing China is less likely to go to war, than one who "can afford it". Look at Japan pre-WWII. They basically went to war to refresh…

> They basically went to war to refresh the coffers of Empire

This is technically true on its face, but second-order thinking reveals why the "coffers" were low in the first place. The United States goaded them into war by intentionally cutting off their oil supplies.

Pearl Harbor was no surprise. FDR's advisors knew exactly what they were doing.

Re: undefined

#13

Post by mattbrewsbytes »

keepamovin wrote: post #3
Justsignedup wrote: post #2

Not close. China can't afford it. They are mid economic ruin and can't afford a sustained conflict. Russia is almost out of ammo. Desperately trying to generate more. Suffering from a lot of brain drain. Middle easy is in fighting. There's no way they'd jump into such a war. Nobody wants to directly attack a nato country. who else would be involved?

I'm not saying they are, but if China is mid economic ruin, that might actually be a reason for them to favor conflict. War is often about the spoils, and historically has been used to bolster state coffers in the face of mismanagement, failure or shoddy tax collection. I'm not sure a failing China is less likely to go to war, than one who "can afford it". Look at Japan pre-WWII. They basically went to war to refresh…

China cannot sustain themselves with the resources they have. They've seen the world react to Russia, many countries cutting Russia off financially in many ways. China could probably not survive as a nation if they were economically cut off. Yes many countries would be hurting for some time without being able to import goods but things like food, fertilizer, etc. are kinda key.

China also has a shrinking population, much like Russia, and throwing your young and middle aged men into war isn't going to help population numbers.

Re: undefined

#14

Post by mytailorisrich »

ajuc wrote: post #11
mytailorisrich wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Russia's invasion of Ukraine mostly failed informs about the strength of Russia's military but says nothing about China's. If China is drawing conclusions they must be based on the West's reaction to the invasion, not on Russia's performance. China has been working on these scenarios well before Russia invaded Ukraine because, well, it is obvious that the West controls most of the world's economic and f…

China is using russian equipment (or equipment based on reverse-engineered russian equipment), russian tactics, and is training with Russia. Before 2022 it was generally agreed that in their joint exercises russian army looked better. China has all the corruption problems Russia has, even less oversight and transparency, and fought no competetive wars in which it could be tested. I expect much worse performance from…

China can buy energy from Russia and the Middle East. It is also the second largest economy in the world with the second largest population, which means they can produce mountains of military equipment if needed, which Russia's small economy cannot.

China is coupled to the West in a way that makes the West at least a dependent on China as China is on the West.

There is no comparison with Russia and, if anything Ukraine shows China the mistakes no to make.

Re: undefined

#15

Post by ajuc »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #14
ajuc wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is using russian equipment (or equipment based on reverse-engineered russian equipment), russian tactics, and is training with Russia. Before 2022 it was generally agreed that in their joint exercises russian army looked better. China has all the corruption problems Russia has, even less oversight and transparency, and fought no competetive wars in which it could be tested. I expect much worse performance from…

China can buy energy from Russia and the Middle East. It is also the second largest economy in the world with the second largest population, which means they can produce mountains of military equipment if needed, which Russia's small economy cannot. China is coupled to the West in a way that makes the West at least a dependent on China as China is on the West. There is no comparison with Russia and, if anything Ukrai…

> China can buy energy from Russia and the Middle East

They already do. But they won't have anywhere to sell their products. Most of their economy gone just like that.

> China is coupled to the West in a way that makes the West at least a dependent on China as China is on the West.

Nope. For west decoupling means higher inflation but lower unemployment and faster growth. You win more than you lose. For China it means economic decline, unemployment, budget deficits. Catastrophe from all POV.

BTW it's already happening to some degree, just slowly - old factories are still operating in China, but new ones are built near USA/EU - in Mexico, Eastern Europe, Turkey, etc.

Re: undefined

#16

Post by RetroTechie »

houseatrielah wrote: post #8

The next war is Russia-China vs West escalated by China invading Taiwan or N. Korea invading S. Korea. Then maybe it goes nuclear... but the only way to win a nuclear war is to win on surprise attack first-strike -- so maybe there will be a surprise attack nuclear exchange before the invasions. In terms of Israel, maybe they will annex Gaza, but its not a ww3 thing.

> the only way to win a nuclear war is to win on surprise attack first-strike

No win: any counterstrike need only be airborne before that 1st strike hits (ignoring submarines).

In your example: NK might be able to strike SK by surprise - short distance, missiles could could cover it in a few minutes.

But in case of NK striking SK, countries allied with SK wouldn't leave NK unpunished. So even if NK's 1st strike were 'successful', it would still be annihilated by the response. If not by SK, then by its allies.

On top of that: not all 1st strike missiles would reach their enemy, hit their target, or manage to destroy all their enemies' missiles.

TLDR; there's no win in all-out nuclear war.

Re: undefined

#17

Post by houseatrielah »

RetroTechie wrote: post #16
houseatrielah wrote: post #8

The next war is Russia-China vs West escalated by China invading Taiwan or N. Korea invading S. Korea. Then maybe it goes nuclear... but the only way to win a nuclear war is to win on surprise attack first-strike -- so maybe there will be a surprise attack nuclear exchange before the invasions. In terms of Israel, maybe they will annex Gaza, but its not a ww3 thing.

> the only way to win a nuclear war is to win on surprise attack first-strike No win: any counterstrike need only be airborne before that 1st strike hits (ignoring submarines). In your example: NK might be able to strike SK by surprise - short distance, missiles could could cover it in a few minutes. But in case of NK striking SK, countries allied with SK wouldn't leave NK unpunished. So even if NK's 1st strike were…

There's hypersonic missiles and in terms of submarines -- we can detect a wobble of some planet a zillion miles away -- maybe there exists a mechanism to detect subs with increasing precision of instrumentation. The definition of "win" for a western democracy may be very different than the definition of "win" for a Communist government.

Re: undefined

#20

Post by user_7832 »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #9
ajuc wrote: post #7

Ukraine makes WW3 less likely. If it was conquered quickly - that would make WW3 more likely (because Russia and China would estimate their chances of further conquest higher and would probably start something in Taiwan or Baltic states). Russia issued a statement just before 2022 invasion that demanded NATO back off from Baltic States, Poland, etc. If Ukraine fell quickly they could think they can force this by smal…

The fact that Russia's invasion of Ukraine mostly failed informs about the strength of Russia's military but says nothing about China's. If China is drawing conclusions they must be based on the West's reaction to the invasion, not on Russia's performance. China has been working on these scenarios well before Russia invaded Ukraine because, well, it is obvious that the West controls most of the world's economic and f…

> For instance, payments within China are now almost 100% Alipay and Wechatpay, which means they have completely decoupled and e.g. US networks like Visa and Mastercard are irrelevant.

They may have done these but if I’m not mistaken they yuan is still pegged to the US dollar.

Post reply on HN