The Soviet Union lost the Cold War because the US tricked the military-intelligence dominated Brezhnev[0] "administration" into diverting too much investment towards defense. The result was under-investment in infrastructure and agriculture that doomed the USSR over the long run. The US was able to sustain this because it had a larger industrial base.
Shall we foolishly end up on the other side of that? The Chinese can outproduce us in preparation for a war they do not actually want to fight, it would be terrible if they joined forces with our own defense sector to ransack the private sector and proverbially "eat the seed corn."
[0]He was installed in a coup against the defense-spending-critical Khrushchev.
Their society is rapidly improving. The less they fight, the better off they'll be. What will fighting get them apart from ruin?
It isn't a guarantee of peace, obviously. The same logic applies to everyone and there are still a lot of wars. But the warmakers tend to struggle to achieve the sort of results that the Chinese do and as a government they have a 50 year history of success through peace not war.
HDI growth in China is levelling out, and irredentist claims to Taiwan are a foundational piece of the CCP's ideology. The "strategic ambiguity" could be tolerated while Taiwan was relatively unimportant, but now that TSMC is one of the most important companies in the world, China is certainly at least considering war.
Their society is rapidly stagnating with a disastrous demographic profile. And since it's now a dictatorship the decision ultimately comes down to one man: Chairman Xi. No one knows what's going on in his head so we have to assume the worst.
Yeah but the Russians didn't declare war because of their demographics. In fact, if you ask them why this happened Putin gave a whole speech [0] on this when he sent the troops in, which can be neatly summarised:
> We are talking about what causes us particular concern and anxiety, about those fundamental threats that year after year, step by step, are rudely and unceremoniously created by irresponsible politicians in the West in relation to our country. I mean the expansion of the Nato bloc to the east, bringing its military infrastructure closer to Russian borders.
It isn't obvious that China is dealing with the same sort of pressures in East Asia.
I think it's well-established that Putin's posture on the subject isn't sincere or an accurate assessment of their government's actual motive for war.
If NATO anxiety was the primary factor for the war in Ukraine, Russia wouldn't be so blasé about draining troops and hardware from its borders with NATO countries to throw them into the meat-grinder.
They would still probably do it, mind you, but it would be a huge scandal and a subject of existential dread for Russian media and elites.
The fact that they've been stripping their NATO borders bare with barely anyone noticing or caring shows that nobody views the prospect of a NATO invasion as realistic. It was always a fig leaf.
(Although maybe there were scandals and I never heard of them. My exposure to Russian media is filtered through Western media. But I heard about other scandals and anxieties.)
> The fact that they've been stripping their NATO borders bare with barely anyone noticing or caring shows that nobody views the prospect of a NATO invasion as realistic.
Nobody has ever suggested that there was a prospect of a NATO invasion of Russia. That is crazy talk; it'd be the end of civilisation in the northern hemisphere. They aren't deploying troops to ward off a NATO invasion, that is what the ICBMs are for.
It is unfair to blame only one president for that, if any. The country was going to develop anyway. If Reagan was bad then what stopped Bush, Clinton, Obama, or anyone in Congress, from doing something about the policies that destroy our industries and make China rich?
The same thing they're doing to pose the threat... trade with smaller countries, pressure them not to steal capital assets. But this reference to "democracy" is total propaganda, the US does not use only democratic allies.
Democracy my ass. The politicians these people support and fund will try their damndest to turn the US into a China-style autocracy. Who will this arsenal be aimed at, I wonder?
"Only superior military technology can credibly deter war."
No. Various other factors including large alliances, trade risks, etc can deter war. And by far the biggest "deterrent" among our military technologies is nuclear weaponry, which relies on 1940s technology, thus undermining the essay's thesis that we need to innovate more in defense to prevent war.
With that said, many of the essay's suggestions are sound recommendations for improving the USA's ailing defense industry. I think that the consolidation of companies into a small number of conglomerates is particularly damaging.
Cheap, decentralized, they sail all day over a area waiting for that call to fold and strike? Everyone can make and coilgun a guncotton glider. No takers? Anyone.
Arsenal of democracy my ass. Imperial restocking after selling out all values.
The Soviet Union lost the Cold War because the US tricked the military-intelligence dominated Brezhnev[0] "administration" into diverting too much investment towards defense. The result was under-investment in infrastructure and agriculture that doomed the USSR over the long run. The US was able to sustain this because it had a larger industrial base.
Shall we foolishly end up on the other side of that? The Chinese can outproduce us in preparation for a war they do not actually want to fight, it would be terrible if they joined forces with our own defense sector to ransack the private sector and proverbially "eat the seed corn."
[0]He was installed in a coup against the defense-spending-critical Khrushchev.
The Soviet Union lost the Cold War long after Brezhnev.
The Soviets stopped catching up to the west under Brezhnev, and never recovered from what Gorbachev called, "the era of stagnation."
The Cold War was just one of many factors leading to the Soviet Union collapse. It was a lot more complex than “stopped catching up to the West”.
Source: I lived through it.
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say it was the biggest external influence on the collapse of the Soviet Union.
What makes you think China does not want to fight?
Their society is rapidly improving. The less they fight, the better off they'll be. What will fighting get them apart from ruin?
It isn't a guarantee of peace, obviously. The same logic applies to everyone and there are still a lot of wars. But the warmakers tend to struggle to achieve the sort of results that the Chinese do and as a government they have a 50 year history of success through peace not war.
HDI growth in China is levelling out, and irredentist claims to Taiwan are a foundational piece of the CCP's ideology. The "strategic ambiguity" could be tolerated while Taiwan was relatively unimportant, but now that TSMC is one of the most important companies in the world, China is certainly at least considering war.
Their society is rapidly stagnating with a disastrous demographic profile. And since it's now a dictatorship the decision ultimately comes down to one man: Chairman Xi. No one knows what's going on in his head so we have to assume the worst.
Them having very few youths is hardly an indicator of war is it? I was more concerned when they had a big excess.
Russia is pretty short of young people these days too, and they're all too happy to throw the ones they still have into a pointless war.
Yeah but the Russians didn't declare war because of their demographics. In fact, if you ask them why this happened Putin gave a whole speech [0] on this when he sent the troops in, which can be neatly summarised:
> We are talking about what causes us particular concern and anxiety, about those fundamental threats that year after year, step by step, are rudely and unceremoniously created by irresponsible politicians in the West in relation to our country. I mean the expansion of the Nato bloc to the east, bringing its military infrastructure closer to Russian borders.
It isn't obvious that China is dealing with the same sort of pressures in East Asia.
[0] https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/full-text-putin-s-declar... - although technically I suspect he was declaring Special Military Operation.
I think it's well-established that Putin's posture on the subject isn't sincere or an accurate assessment of their government's actual motive for war.
If NATO anxiety was the primary factor for the war in Ukraine, Russia wouldn't be so blasé about draining troops and hardware from its borders with NATO countries to throw them into the meat-grinder.
They would still probably do it, mind you, but it would be a huge scandal and a subject of existential dread for Russian media and elites.
The fact that they've been stripping their NATO borders bare with barely anyone noticing or caring shows that nobody views the prospect of a NATO invasion as realistic. It was always a fig leaf.
(Although maybe there were scandals and I never heard of them. My exposure to Russian media is filtered through Western media. But I heard about other scandals and anxieties.)
> The fact that they've been stripping their NATO borders bare with barely anyone noticing or caring shows that nobody views the prospect of a NATO invasion as realistic.
Nobody has ever suggested that there was a prospect of a NATO invasion of Russia. That is crazy talk; it'd be the end of civilisation in the northern hemisphere. They aren't deploying troops to ward off a NATO invasion, that is what the ICBMs are for.
Thanks to Ronald Regan, China is strong enough to fight the west
It is unfair to blame only one president for that, if any. The country was going to develop anyway. If Reagan was bad then what stopped Bush, Clinton, Obama, or anyone in Congress, from doing something about the policies that destroy our industries and make China rich?
What do you suggest we do to oppose the threat that China poses to democracy and the post WW2 status quo?
The same thing they're doing to pose the threat... trade with smaller countries, pressure them not to steal capital assets. But this reference to "democracy" is total propaganda, the US does not use only democratic allies.
Which country being the world power is more likely to lead to more countries being democratic -- The United States or China?
For whatever flaws the US has and the atrocities it has committed China isn't going to suddenly start spreading democracy around the world.
Democracy my ass. The politicians these people support and fund will try their damndest to turn the US into a China-style autocracy. Who will this arsenal be aimed at, I wonder?
"Only superior military technology can credibly deter war."
No. Various other factors including large alliances, trade risks, etc can deter war. And by far the biggest "deterrent" among our military technologies is nuclear weaponry, which relies on 1940s technology, thus undermining the essay's thesis that we need to innovate more in defense to prevent war.
With that said, many of the essay's suggestions are sound recommendations for improving the USA's ailing defense industry. I think that the consolidation of companies into a small number of conglomerates is particularly damaging.
Anduril ad?
Lets have some fun and reboot the arsenal of democracy and ban bikes in dictatorships shall we?
https://imgur.com/a/paranoid-dictatorship-forbids-bikes-lk9G...
This is a refurbished bike pump gun, firing up and recycling remolded plastic pellets with botox inside. Easy to make anywhere .
To democratic, to low tech? not enough government handouts?
How about this? shotgunshells and 4 cameras and it can hop around cleaning trenches and houses? much more democratic arsenal?
How about coilgun gliderdrone artillery?
https://imgur.com/a/sad-ie8Ezsk
Cheap, decentralized, they sail all day over a area waiting for that call to fold and strike? Everyone can make and coilgun a guncotton glider. No takers? Anyone.
Arsenal of democracy my ass. Imperial restocking after selling out all values.
https://imgur.com/a/hedgehog-De90woA
LOL. Talk about an oxymoron.
wtf is this? "Audio narrated by Palmer Luckey".
He owns Anduril, the company that published this site
TL;DR The war machine wants more because other war machines get more.