129
advice from a Telegraph columnist (hexbear.net)
submitted 2 months ago by batsforpeace@hexbear.net to c/the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments

China is probably not yet ready to mount a complex air-sea invasion of Taiwan, with the mighty USA at its back. But it would have no real difficulties making land invasion into Russia.

Taiwan.. not yet, too hard, but Russia is officially a GO opines our dunk tank subject, further free military advice for China can be found in the article

all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Acute_Engles@hexbear.net 61 points 2 months ago

This reads like someone really trying to get the new player in their diplomacy game to make a huge misplay

[-] Melonius@hexbear.net 56 points 2 months ago

Does China know that alt + f4 brings up enemy spy locations?

[-] Wertheimer@hexbear.net 33 points 2 months ago

Ukraine's not even a supply center; Russia needs to take Budapest by the end of autumn if they want to build this year.

[-] large_goblin@hexbear.net 58 points 2 months ago

Geopolitics is just a map painting game to these people. When your borders are bigger thats good. Why would you not want your borders to be bigger? Graduated from Total War university with a PhD in Medieval 2 crusade strategies.

[-] EmoThugInMyPhase@hexbear.net 28 points 2 months ago

Biden should seduce Xi and have sex with him to own Putler and Brumpfk

[-] Awoo@hexbear.net 54 points 2 months ago

Why though?

Stupid idiot with no conception of anything beyond map painting games.

Why attack Russia? They couldn't occupy it, you would need to erase the local language and replace it with Chinese which isn't going to be something you get away with in current China not to mention the way the rest of the world would use this. Takeover or occupation is off the table. So what else? Install puppet that does what you want? Russia is already trading with China and doing what they want (mostly). What benefit does China get out of this? Unfair trading relationship? They're communists, not capitalists, a colonial style unfair trading relationship like the west enters into by installing puppets everywhere in the world is not ideologically on the table for them.

It's so fucking stupid. It really highlights how stupid these people are and that they really don't understand anything at all.

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml 52 points 2 months ago

"Attack your biggest ally so we can have easier time attacking you later. Sincerely, your biggest enemy" - nothing more than that, and even US diplomats are like that just not this openly, so what you expect of some random journo.

[-] buckykat@hexbear.net 51 points 2 months ago

Famously easy to invade place, Russia.

Does he really think China just loves doing invasions for the sake of doing invasions like the US

[-] batsforpeace@hexbear.net 30 points 2 months ago

either that or he's trolling

[-] ksynwa@lemmygrad.ml 28 points 2 months ago

Settler realism

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 2 months ago

China is also historically pretty bad on invasions. PRC did two and lost first and draw second.

[-] buckykat@hexbear.net 24 points 2 months ago

What are the odds this Telegraph idiot thinks the liberation of Tibet was a Chinese invasion?

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 2 months ago

300% at least. Also the first invasion i mentioned, Taiwan at the end of civil war, was only an invasion from stricte military point of view as in "naval invasion operation", because you can't invade your own country.

[-] BurgerPunk@hexbear.net 49 points 2 months ago

China isn't going for a domination victory. They're clearly after a science victory. That's why they chose the communism government for the production bonus. It makes more sense to maintain their level 2 alliance with russia for extra gold to buy builder units that can speed up lengthy spaceport projects.

[-] spectre@hexbear.net 10 points 1 month ago

Literally this

[-] BurgerPunk@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

There is no other way to interpret this than as someone who's been kept in sensory deprivation with only 4x games then asked to write about the real world.

Like dude should be writing articles critiquing the strategies of twitch streamers not governments irl

[-] spectre@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago

Your comment did an excellent job of matching his energy lol

[-] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 48 points 2 months ago

Got downvoted to hell on .world the other day for saying "maybe, hear me out, China doesn't consider invasions because it's not a militaristic, expansionist country?"

[-] BurgerPunk@hexbear.net 21 points 2 months ago

They hated you because you spoke the truth

[-] Radiantprime@feddit.uk 2 points 1 month ago

I think it probably could be fairly defined as either but I would also grant you that they could be considered to have much different goals as a whole than Western militaristic and expansionary endeavours and that, generally speaking, they balance those goals against a wider group or population than you would see the West doing.

Are they happy to expand into contested zones? Absolutely. Will they make shows of force to do so? Absolutely. If it means a protracted military solution though then that's not going to happen, they're not interested. They will attempt to find a commercial solution or they will just wait for an opportunity over a very long period of time.

[-] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago

Are they happy to expand into contested zones?

Isn't that... the definition of contested zones? Like, Morocco contests Ceuta and Melilla, Spain contests Gibraltar... and there's endless political tension from these issues.

They will attempt to find a commercial solution

Doesn't this go against the definition of militarism?

[-] Collatz_problem@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago

Doesn't this go against the definition of militarism?

"War, trade, and piracy together are a trinity not to be severed."

90% of wars are for commercial interests, and the rest are sus too.

[-] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago

Wars being for commercial interests, doesn't imply that engaging in trade makes you militaristic

[-] Collatz_problem@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago

But it is not opposed to it, and in fact often correlates with it.

[-] vovchik_ilich@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah but china isn't a country known for engaging in military action

[-] Collatz_problem@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago

Yes, but pointing at commercial interests is not helping this case at all.

[-] EmoThugInMyPhase@hexbear.net 38 points 2 months ago

It’s really funny how westerners think everyone is salivating at the prospect of war for any reason just because they are

[-] WittyProfileName2@hexbear.net 37 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

With early autumn settling in, the NATOists' thoughts draw to winter and their desire to die in the snow in a desperate attempt to push east, like so many Nazis before them.

[-] Barx@hexbear.net 37 points 2 months ago

These people are paid to write lmao

[-] miz@hexbear.net 33 points 2 months ago

the mighty USA

[laughs in Yemeni Arabic]

[-] REgon@hexbear.net 31 points 2 months ago

HOI4 and it's consequences. The US couldn't even deal with Afghanistan, but somehow all the military pundits in the west still think "yeah annex territory of a hostile populace, that's what they want". Why? For what reason? What would there be to gain?

[-] kleeon@hexbear.net 26 points 2 months ago

"Invade Russia" focus takes 120 days unfortunately. Paradox plz fix

[-] SkingradGuard@hexbear.net 26 points 2 months ago

Why in the ever loving fuck would they attack Russia?

Liberals think everyone is as bloodthrist as they are.

[-] take_five_seconds@hexbear.net 24 points 2 months ago

lmao wat

[-] LeZero@hexbear.net 23 points 2 months ago

The projection is unreal

[-] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 22 points 2 months ago

Send him first.

[-] Hexboare@hexbear.net 21 points 2 months ago

Definitely easier to invade the world's largest country than the worlds ~130th one, i am very smart pls give money Telegraph

[-] LeZero@hexbear.net 13 points 2 months ago

With one of the biggest nuclear arsenal as well

[-] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 20 points 2 months ago

There might never be a better time for George Allison to suck a fart and hold it in until he suffocates on a fuckin fart

[-] tombruzzo@hexbear.net 13 points 2 months ago

Xi, are you reading this?!?!

[-] MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 month ago

Probably the funniest part to me... who is this for??

this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
129 points (99.2% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15908 readers
700 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
KiaKaha@hexbear.net
wantonviolins@hexbear.net
itsPina@hexbear.net
MiraculousMM@hexbear.net
corgiwithalaptop@hexbear.net
VILenin@hexbear.net
blashork@hexbear.net
replaceable@hexbear.net
EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net
InsidiousTrackers@hexbear.net