Fat Trudeau becomes unglued when a Canadian doesn't support his corrupt war in Ukraine

[Dougie93]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

TBH I thought that would happen too. On paper it sure looked that way. 

I'm really surprised that the Ukraine forces held out so long. 

I too gave the Russians way too much credit

I predicted this war on another forum, before 2014

I predicted an escalation, wherein the Russians would attempt to take eastern Ukraine up to the Dniepr

I predicted that we would be at the brink of war with Russia

but I predicted that the Russians would be doing way better than this

I did predict that the Ukrainians would fight, but not like this,  I didn't think the Ukrainians had this in them neither

[WestCanMan]

I read somewhere that Chinese cyber-intelligence teams outnumber the NSA's guys 40-1, and that they're just hammering away at the US on a daily basis.

They also have students at America's top universities, tech institutes, and tech companies, pilfering all the latest tech.

Does America have even close to the same level of ability to steal Chinese secrets and technology? 

[Dougie93]

12 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Dude, China built over 100 warships since 2015, and not shitty ones either. 

They're building stealth fighters and everything else like it's going out of style.

You think that the US is still way ahead of them? 

it's the Communism which is the fatal flaw

the Soviets too had the largest navy in the world once

the Soviets were a force that makes Russia look like Canada

but what happened ?

the Soviets collapsed under the weight of their delusional post scarcity utopian totalitarian ideology

[Dougie93]

39 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I'd rather see them hit China tbh. Get rid of those man-man islands in the SCS.

They're the ones we need to worry about.

what are the three most important lessons of Cold War One ?

1. don't buy the hype ;

the Communists ain't ten feet tall

2. the Domino Theory was wrong ;

the Soviets & Chinese were actually sworn enemies who could be pitted against each other

3. never start a land war in Asia

[WestCanMan]

8 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

it's the Communism which is the fatal flaw

the Soviets too had the largest navy in the world once

the Soviets were a force that makes Russia look like Canada

but what happened ?

the Soviets collapsed under the weight of their delusional post scarcity utopian totalitarian ideology

I wish I had your sense of optimism. The Chinese are scary AF. They killed more of their own people than America killed enemies in all their wars combined. Then at the end of the last century, they were putting babies in mini death camps. They'd wipe out the population of Canada like it was nothing.  

You think that they of the 100-year plans are so shortsighted that they're already imploding? 

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I wish I had your sense of optimism. The Chinese are scary AF. They killed more of their own people than America killed enemies in all their wars combined. Then at the end of the last century, they were putting babies in mini death camps. They'd wipe out the population of Canada like it was nothing.  

You think that they of the 100-year plans are so shortsighted that they're already imploding? 

yes, they are already imploding

however, this in of itself is a threat to incite World War Three

as the contagion of China imploding will implode the entire debt based global economy in the process

then all heck is gonna break loose, in every theatre on earth at once

[CdnFox]

39 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

If Putin keeps this up, Russia could become a Chinese colony.

 

23 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Dude, China built over 100 warships since 2015, and not shitty ones either. 

Well they didn't build 100 warships in 2015 of course.  They finished around that number - but that is not the same thing. Really they've only bulid 240 ships in 20 years.  The fact that in one year they finished an unusual number means nothing.

And the us production  of large warships was higher than that in ww2 when they were trying. America's ship building capacity is vastly higher.  And their other manufacturing is as well.

23 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

They're building stealth fighters and everything else like it's going out of style.

No, they're not. They're producing more than they have in the past but not that many. Again, if the us were trying they would greatly outstrip that. China's at pretty close to max production, the us is not even trying. But when they do they can produce HUGE amounts of material.

China simply doesn't have that kind of capacity.

23 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

You think that the US is still way ahead of them?

There can be no doubt. The Chinese are catching up but they're no where near the production capacity of or the quality of the ships the US has. Their newest carrier is getting up there, very impressive, but while they've closed the gap they're just not at the same level.

But - we're really talking about production of war material here. How many missiles, how many shells, how many anti tank guns etc etc can they produce. And china can't hold a candle ot what the US and it's allies can turn out if they're getting serious.

 

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I wish I had your sense of optimism. The Chinese are scary AF. They killed more of their own people than America killed enemies in all their wars combined. Then at the end of the last century, they were putting babies in mini death camps. They'd wipe out the population of Canada like it was nothing.  

You think that they of the 100-year plans are so shortsighted that they're already imploding? 

Weren't you just going on about how peaceful and good natured they were? You got right upset when i posted info which suggested that might not be true. Now you're worried that they are blood thirsty killing machines.

Consistency - look it up.

[Dougie93]

12 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I wish I had your sense of optimism. The Chinese are scary AF.

nec aspera terrent

plus the US Navy nuclear submarine force could sink the PLA Navy with impunity

they can't see us coming nor going

you don't even send the Carrier Strike Groups into harms way : until you have won the submarine war

[CdnFox]

9 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

yes, they are already imploding

however, this in of itself is a threat to incite World War Three

as the contagion of China imploding will implode the entire debt based global economy in the process

then all heck is gonna break loose, in every theatre on earth at once

Honestly i don't see it. China imploding (unless it breaks down to serious civil war) will have significant economic impacts of course, but remember that while many buy things FROM them very few sell things TO them, they keep their markets closed to others.

I think that the biggest issue would be a lack of supply of various electronic components which would soon be taken up by other countries. That's one of the good things about capitalism, it does find a way to adapt.

 

[Dougie93]

4 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Honestly i don't see it. China imploding (unless it breaks down to serious civil war) will have significant economic impacts of course, but remember that while many buy things FROM them very few sell things TO them, they keep their markets closed to others.

I think that the biggest issue would be a lack of supply of various electronic components which would soon be taken up by other countries. That's one of the good things about capitalism, it does find a way to adapt.

the global economy is already a powderkeg

two hundred trillion dollars of debt for only fifty trillion dollars of productivity

China imploding would simply be the fuse lit

[WestCanMan]

5 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

you don't even send the Carrier Strike Groups into harms way : until you have won the submarine war

I dunno if it's intentional Chinese disinformation, but apparently their main focus is their surface fleet. 

They are going to have less than ten nuclear attack subs, the US has 50. 

[Dougie93]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

I dunno if it's intentional Chinese disinformation, but apparently their main focus is their surface fleet. 

They are going to have less than ten nuclear attack subs, the US has 50. 

there are only two types of warships

nuclear submarines, and targets

[Dougie93]

8 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

 but apparently their main focus is their surface fleet.

thus why the Russians remain the primary threat

the remnants of the Soviet nuclear submarine force remains the second most powerful arm of decision on earth

[WestCanMan]

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

there are only two types of warships

nuclear submarines, and targets

Dude, I served on a MacKenzie class 'destroyer' (actually a frigate) from '87 to '90. The only thing we had going for us is the fact that we were the least valuable targets in any scenario. Arguably not even worth a missile or torpedo. (I recall reading a book, maybe the one about the sinking of the Bismark by Ludovic Kennedy, apparently a German u-boat commander (Wohlfarth iirc) was in position to fire on two capital ships at once, from the bow and stern, but he was already out of torpedoes.)

I never once saw a submarine that whole time, probably hundreds saw us. Maybe thousands. 

No doubt our sonar guys caught a few in their sights, but again, far less often than they got us in theirs. 

If it came to war, and for some reason we became a valuable target (eg, a Churchill family member was on our ship), I doubt we'd last half a day on our own. 

[WestCanMan]

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

thus why the Russians remain the primary threat

the remnants of the Soviet nuclear submarine force remains the second most powerful arm of decision on earth

Ahead of the French and British? 

[Dougie93]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

Dude, I served on a MacKenzie class 'destroyer' (actually a frigate) from '87 to '90. The only thing we had going for us is the fact that we were the least valuable targets in any scenario. Arguably not even worth a missile or torpedo. (I recall reading a book, maybe the one about the sinking of the Bismark by Ludovic Kennedy, apparently a German u-boat commander (Wohlfarth iirc) was in position to fire on two capital ships at once, from the bow and stern, but he was already out of torpedoes.)

I never once saw a submarine that whole time, probably hundreds saw us. Maybe thousands. 

No doubt our sonar guys caught a few in their sights, but again, far less often than they got us in theirs. 

If it came to war, and for some reason we became a valuable target (eg, a Churchill family member was on our ship), I doubt we'd last half a day on our own. 

SOSUS would have been vectoring the SSN-688's to the threat coming through the G-I-UK Gap

the Soviet boat Captains would have had their own problems, up in the saddle in the baffles

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Ahead of the French and British? 

that's all NATO

but yes, the Russian sub force is more than the British & French combined

Edited March 4, 2023 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Dude, I served on a MacKenzie class 'destroyer' (actually a frigate) from '87 to '90. The only thing we had going for us is the fact that we were the least valuable targets in any scenario. Arguably not even worth a missile or torpedo. (I recall reading a book, maybe the one about the sinking of the Bismark by Ludovic Kennedy, apparently a German u-boat commander (Wohlfarth iirc) was in position to fire on two capital ships at once, from the bow and stern, but he was already out of torpedoes.)

I never once saw a submarine that whole time, probably hundreds saw us. Maybe thousands. 

No doubt our sonar guys caught a few in their sights, but again, far less often than they got us in theirs. 

If it came to war, and for some reason we became a valuable target (eg, a Churchill family member was on our ship), I doubt we'd last half a day on our own. 

just think back to the Falkland Islands War of 1982

the whole war was decided before the British even landed

when HMS Conqueror sunk ARA Belgrano, with two obsolete Mk.8 World War Two era torpedoes

after which, the Argentine navy fled back to port, in the face of any further nuclear submarine attacks

effectively abandoning their forces on the Falklands

just one nuclear submarine, won the war, in an afternoon

Edited March 4, 2023 by Dougie93

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

the global economy is already a powderkeg

two hundred trillion dollars of debt for only fifty trillion dollars of productivity

China imploding would simply be the fuse lit

I can see why youd think that but really it's not that bad. We might see a severe recession but the world would very quickly adapt and we'd be fine. Not without wounds and scars but not that bad.

Economies and people are a lot more resilient than some would think.

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I can see why youd think that but really it's not that bad. We might see a severe recession but the world would very quickly adapt and we'd be fine. Not without wounds and scars but not that bad.

Economies and people are a lot more resilient than some would think.

it's not about us in the First World

the theatres of conflict are in the Second & Third Worlds

Kazakhstan & Sri Lanka have imploded already

in Kazakhstan, Russians forces have already been deployed to put down a revolution

[CdnFox]

18 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

it's not about us in the First World

the theatres of conflict are in the Second & Third Worlds

Kazakhstan & Sri Lanka have imploded already

in Kazakhstan, Russians forces have already been deployed to put down a revolution

There's always unrest in the third world countries, but i'm not sure i see how china specifically blowing up would make that extraordinarily worse. If anything there might be some provincial breakaway action (kind of like we saw when the soviets packed it in)  but i'm not sure there'd be a whole lot of 'unusual' conflict. Certainly nothing that would ilkely be concerning beyond the concern one would normally feel for those in war.

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

There's always unrest in the third world countries, but i'm not sure i see how china specifically blowing up would make that extraordinarily worse. If anything there might be some provincial breakaway action (kind of like we saw when the soviets packed it in)  but i'm not sure there'd be a whole lot of 'unusual' conflict. Certainly nothing that would ilkely be concerning beyond the concern one would normally feel for those in war.

the whole global economy is relying on the Chinese economy for a bailout

when in fact China itself is spiralling into a debt crisis

it's not about whether you and I can weather an economic storm

it's about governments

governments are not resilient as individuals

don't assume that the Third World War will break out between NATO & Russia, nor NATO & China

the First World War broke out between Austria & Serbia

the Second World War broke out, not a Pearl Harbor, but when Japan invaded Manchuria

take for example Pakistan

this is a very weak government, with an economy which is totally reliant on the IMF to prop them up

in the event of global debt crisis, Pakistan would spiral into disorder, then could easily fall to the Taliban

then nuclear armed India is faced with a nuclear armed Taliban in a fight over the Kashmir

[Dougie93]

12 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

There's always unrest in the third world countries,

in terms of a NATO v. Russia faultline

it's not even in Ukraine

it's in the South Caucasus

between Turkish ( NATO ) proxy Azerbaijan & Russian proxy Armenia

[Dougie93]

16 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

There's always unrest in the third world countries

in terms of a war on the South China Sea

it's not going to brake out between America & China

it's not going to be China invading Taiwan

the opening phases of the Pacific theatre war

are most likely to be between China & Vietnam, over the Paracel's 

with America backing our once mortal enemy in Communist Vietnam

against Vietnam's once Communist ally against America,  in China