Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kimmo

What a joke

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, chrisg said:

Hopefully only until the next American election  🙂

 

Cheers

 

The election is actually the problem. Trump is in election mode, he needs to be seen as winning all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

Not going to show that very well if the Dow collapses - it hasn't yet, but it has taken a hit, so too has the US $.

 

If he is smart he'll back down on the trade war, but I doubt he will, which just means China will manipulate him -- what else is new, join the Queue, Putin and fat boy Kim already are.

 

It would be great but possibly dangerous to his election success, because Americans are fundamentally gun crazy, if he were to campaign on a "get rid of assault rifles" basis, but he's lied or let people down so many times it might be a case of prove it - ban them BEFORE the election - that's hardly likely to happen.

 

I read today that his brags about negotiating the cost of the new Air Force Ones down by a million plus has not come to pass - they have ballooned out by a couple of mil. All he has to say is "we put some more stuff in" but did not elaborate, probably because he doesn't know.

 

In a sense I can't totally blame him for that, they were always going to overshoot his price goal, it has been a very long time since Boeing built any new Air Force ones. But the planes were sitting begging because a Russian airline collapsed before taking delivery. He had them over a barrel, especially with the sluggish to non-existent sales of the 747-8 - great deal maker huh ?

 

I really cannot think of much that could be added to a 747 that was not already on the moribund -8s or extant on the ageing out Air Force ones, certainly not millions extra.

 

As usual, blowing hot air....

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, chrisg said:

Theoretically only Leo and not against a large assault. Iron Dome is not foolproof, nothing is. In any attack and defend situation the attacker always retains the advantage.

 

Iron Dome is about 90% successful with 900 rockets and 735 intercepts. And it’s even better now post-2014.

 

In any attack and defend situation, the one who has the best defence, has the advantage - they can launch more counter-attacks.

 

7 hours ago, chrisg said:

It gets somewhat irrelevant if you do not have a complete "Dome" over Europe

 

With Aegis Ashore, Marine and THAAD, you do. Be aware that missile defence of Russia is next to impossible because of budget and because Russia’s population density is not that high. In fact Russia’s ABM dome covers Moscow, and that’s it.

 

If Russia fires anything towards Europe, it cops not only Europe’s arsenal from the West, it also cops it from Tridents and American assets from the North, and Canada and America from the East where it is hideously exposed to America’s largest air base in Alaska.

 

You simply don’t understand just how vulnerable Russia is. You keep thinking that Putin will start a war - Russia’s only asset is that some people are afraid of it because Russia says they should be afraid. Russia is a military behemoth without the budget to make that military useful. You can’t run a war when you can’t afford it.

 

7 hours ago, chrisg said:

Defending Europe against a concerted IRBM attack is a nightmare that NATO does not want

 

Nobody wants to defend anything from a concerted IRBM attack, but your worry about Russia flies in the face of reality.

 

Russia is concerned against NATO and American missile defences precisely because it nullifies Russia’s assault capability in its own sector. Russia literally are boxed in by NATO.

 

To fire first would be suicidal. And Russia might be the Arab country of Europe but on the suicidal aspect, they’re not like the Arabs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

No actually, in general when the world is calm, or as calm as it gets I am not in the least bit worried about Russia starting a war. Which does make one wonder why they have such a large nuclear stockpile.

 

I do totally understand just how exposed they are, between the Minutemen, getting old and on track to be replaced, the Tridents out there in the depths, the possibility of the whole of the American bombing force launching on them .Granted a whole 20 B2s and the B1s supposedly no longer nuclear capable plus  around 70 B-52s left, they are to all intent and purpose at the mercy of any American retaliation, there is no way they could win.

 

However if a nutcase launches on the U.S. from Russia, a possibility no one wants to discuss, neither could the U.S. or by extension the entire globe.

 

The argument over nuclear winter vacillates back and forth but I tend to give it credence.

 

Either way it only takes one nut and you have a mass shooting, on a global scale.

 

Most of those Iron Dome successes were against  Katyushas or similar - that thing dates back to WWWII, it's a firework.

 

Actually the ancient Moscow ring of Galosh missiles is in the process of being dismantled so Russia does not have any formal ABM capability that it admits to, at all.

 

no, it's not particularly a sane Russia that bothers me, although sanity can be relative, it's other parts of the world. This week India/Pakistan, more rumblings between China and Taiwan. also the nutters in Iran.

 

The world is a very unsafe place, if we can make it just a little bit safer by keeping IRBMs off the table I'd much prefer it.

 

That's really all I'm saying, keep the treaty and seek to get China and India and Pakistan,you can probably forget about Iran, to sign it, don't tear it up, that is one heck of a backward step.

 

I've no idea if China would sign it, it sort of predates their even having the capability, but they would have at least looked at it because they also are incredibly vulnerable to the might of the U.S. triumvirate of nuclear capability. 

 

That's why we are hearing all this bluster over new hypersonic carrier busting etc missiles.

 

It's all rubbish, only one part of the triumvirate has to even party get through and China and/or Russia are decimated. But if we trust the " no first strike" policy by the U.S. so is the United States.

 

All it takes is one nut Leo, on either side. America's checks and balances are somewhat better than Russia's, but possibly not by much.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by chrisg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You’re clinging to old outdated war stereotypes.

 

China has effectively won the South China Sea without firing a shot and convincing Americans to call their own president a nutter while china manipulates currency and culture (bought Hollywood, making Chinese bad guys an impossibility), CCTV (their RT) broadcasts propaganda before the west can get their pants on, they’ve bought the US Chamber of Commerce just like the Arabs bought the State Department.

 

China escalate to deescalate. But each time they escalate, they de-escalate a little bit higher than the original level. It’s how they took Tibet. It’s how they are taking the South China Sea.

 

Russia too. Crimea wasn’t won by the Russian Army. It was won by PMCs inc. the Wagner Group. Gives Russia plausible deniability. Anyone with money (and Putin has it) can get mercenaries in to destabilise fragile states. I’ve said before that Ukraine shouldn’t exist, it’s a historical anomaly split between a Russian Orthodox and Catholic population that have never lived joined lives.

 

Hell there are even PMC for jihadis. Malhama Tactical based in Uzbekistan sell apolitical Sunni trained special forces to whatever Sunni insurgency wants a strike team to rival Western special forces.

 

In 2015 there were some 50 wars. Only one of them was “conventional”. All others were against drug cartels, terrorists, infra-ethnic, etc.

 

Does it really matter which conventional weapon you use against these? Is a $130m F35 better than an F111 in this instance?

 

IRBMs are useless except for posture. In fact, it appears most tech is - because you don’t need tech to get what you want. Russia and China prove that. So does Israel. So does Turkey.

 

Forget all this shit Chris. No one’s starting a conventional war. The only people who care about these stupid treaties are deep staters (not the conspiracy kind, but the institutionalised generals and admirals and their idiotic brethren in american political elites) - nobody else does. The military-industrial complex gets paid if they can ratchet up some excuse about needing new weapons to comply with international law or a new threat from China or Russia (who realise their weapons are for posture as America would tear them to pieces in conventional warfare).

 

Our enemies “escalate to de-escalate”, flouting “international law” which we hold ourselves to as if it fucken exists. There’s no international law - it’s 60% diplomatic convention, 40% treaties between countries. There’s no international cop, no international prison and no international judiciary. The UN’s Mandate was to prevent war since 1946. It couldn’t even stop a genocide in Sierra Leone, with an outlay of US$49m a month. Took a PMC being paid US$1.2m a month to do that. So the UN’s credibility is shot to shit - it’s a talk fest for dictators.

 

None of this technology matters except for posture. Nor do the treaties.

 

Along comes a President using a different weapon (economic sanctions without the framework of “international laws” and he’s a nutter?). China won’t be stopped by American conventional weapons because they deescalate as soon as the escalation gets to the brink of war.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd very much like you to be correct, just not quite convinced as yet.

 

From little incidents big consequences can come, the current situation in Hong Kong is one of them.

 

 China had thought they would get away with it but Hong Kong did not stand for it and as the global financial hub that it is they need to treat it with kid gloves.

 

I totally agree, most all high tech weaponry has been decadent for decades but if one side stops making it the other gains an advantage.

 

Most all nations pretty much behave like spoiled children most all of the time.

 

It is way past time to grow up, but I'm not holding my breath...

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

China is not going to IRBM Hong Kong.

 

More importantly, Trump’s trade war has seriously hurt them.

 

You overestimate the power of China. It’s a huge part of the global supply chain but it’s a tiny part of the patent world. Almost nothing China exports is possible without Western technology. And there are plenty of other countries suitable to mass manufacturing. India, Thailand, Mongolia, the former soviet Republics, etc.

 

There is not going to be a conventional war - there are other wars that cost less and give you plausible deniability.

 

Trump may understand this. He’s not from the deep state or the military-industrial complex. He may actually understand that you can beat China by cratering the Renmibi at only a slight impact to americans (as long as you can weather the criticism from economists who don’t realise that economic warfare costs, just like conventional warfare and some hardship is to be expected).

 

China is literally fucked. An open free (-ish) economy will utterly decimate a centrally administered one in an economic war. No shots fired.

Edited by Leonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

China has become a little to big, it needs a correction but no, of course they are not going to IRBM HKK, on the other hand if they make it a place where expats do not feel comfortable doing business the impact upon their economy will be severe.

 

Companies, the big ones, are perfectly capable of picking up and leaving, in much the same way as they are already doing from the City of London because of the Brexit confusion.

 

I would not dismiss Chinese innovation so casually though. It is true they basically stole a lot to jump start things but now they are developing their own in-house products.

 

We will see a lot of innovation from China in the future.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chrisg said:

in much the same way as they are already doing from the City of London because of the Brexit confusion.

 

I'm going to buy as many pounds as I can the evening before the UK crashes out of the EU.

 

Gonna make thousands when the pound jumps back in a week.

 

Suggest you divest of all EU assets. They're fucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They made the mistake, for all the right reasons, of being very quick to accept applications for membership from former Soviet Block states.

 

It's produced a tidal wave of movement withing the Union, mostly into Germany but other founding member states as well of economic refugees that is disrupting individual economies.

 

You mentioned somewhere how strong the Polish economy is - makes you wonder about the large number of Poles now living in the U.K and not on welfare either.

 

The EU is going through a crisis that it created itself for, I repeat perfectly good reasons. It may well bring the concept to its knees, I hope not, but I view the country of my birth leaving it as a very serious error.

 

The pound may well sag then recover, but you best keep a very close eye on it, its daytrader territory.

 

Great Britain wants to "strengthen ties "with countries like Canada and Australia, the ties are already strong in both cases and more. Makes me reasonably certain Johnson sniffed too much coke at Eaton...

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, chrisg said:

Great Britain wants to "strengthen ties "with countries like Canada and Australia, the ties are already strong in both cases and more.

 

We can’t have an FTA with the UK because of Italian tomato farmers.

 

Fuck the EU. I hope that theocracy burns down just like Iran’s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

🙂

 

The U.K. is hardly an exporter of tomatoes but I do get your point, just not as vitriolic about it as you.

 

Cheers

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Leonid said:

 

NSW can’t have a FTA with England because of Victorian tomato farmers.

🤷‍♀️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Nich... said:

🤷‍♀️

 

If either of these were sovereign states, you’d have a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You say that like the Australian colonies coming together to form the commonwealth isn't basically what the EU is to Europe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's nothing like it.  The colonies were all under English control.  The people of "united" Australia get to vote in elections to choose who runs the federation of states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they do... but the formation of Aus is nothing like the EU.

 

I think it sort of funny but disturbing how so many opposed globalisation in the corporate sense for so long but these days political globalisation, or at least formation of these "blocs" is some sort of good thing.

It's just wealth redistrubition by stealth and of dubious benefit to the economically strong nations involved.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rybags said:

I think it sort of funny but disturbing how so many opposed globalisation in the corporate sense for so long but these days political globalisation, or at least formation of these "blocs" is some sort of good thing.

It's just wealth redistrubition by stealth and of dubious benefit to the economically strong nations involved.

There are pros and cons both ways, but I find it amusing that people who get really anti-globalism, on a national scale, tend to be really pro-nationalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, Nich... said:

... but I find it amusing that people who get really anti-globalism, on a national scale, tend to be really pro-nationalism.

why ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's pretty much a proven fact that humans perform better when organised into competing groups.

 

Example - tender and procurement processese in capitalism.  And the soviet communists did it too.  They had/have multiple competing aviation bureuas and when a requirement was put forward they'd compete to produce the best prototype to be selected for production.

It scales up, and it scales down.

Edited by Rybags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eveln said:

 

why ?

 

Because all the arguments for keeping out those dirty illegal immigrants are the same against free travel between states.  Taking jobs, driving up house prices, etc.  You can keep on breaking it down to lower levels: screw those people from SEQ coming up to where you live and taking all your jobs and houses. 

 

ie, It's an argument for the status quo without any real questioning of why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Nich... said:

Because all the arguments for keeping out those dirty illegal immigrants are the same against free travel between states. 

you are referring to States within a country aren't you ? I'm not sure I know where "free travel" between the States, is illegal at all. Where as your " dirty illegal immigrants " are people trying to enter a country without following that country's protocol ( which all those with in the country are required to do already. if they don't then jail or fines etc. follow) I don't see how globalisation is going to help with jobs and housing etc.

... I don't want to screw anyone and don't want to be screwed by anyone either, although that's a pretty tough ask with our self-important-self aggrandising-over paid-pollies right now.

 

People will have to spread out from the city centres cos we keep having babies and letting in "refugees" that need a place to live. That's a fact. That doesn't make one a gloabalist, that makes one a realist, and speaking for myself, a nationalist too.

 

Europe is a combination of countries not States. Even after so many years being termed the EU, if you ask someone where they come from they will give you the name of their country rather than say they come from the EU. I don't think globalisation is ultimately healthy.

I think the idea of it is seen by some as a glorified utopio, but given the awfulness of human nature it will resemble something more like a worldwide concentration of slavery 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Globalisation can be taken at many levels.

 

Politically we are far, far from it.

 

Commercially we are much , much closer.

 

Apple, Nike,  IBM, they they do not care where they source their products, so long as the price is right, and the same goes for where they sell them.

 

The political divide is quite wide, and likely to remain so, but capitalists do not care, political differences are to them not obstacles but challenges.

 

Cheers

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eveln said:

you are referring to States within a country aren't you ? I'm not sure I know where "free travel" between the States, is illegal at all. Where as your " dirty illegal immigrants " are people trying to enter a country without following that country's protocol ( which all those with in the country are required to do already. if they don't then jail or fines etc. follow) I don't see how globalisation is going to help with jobs and housing etc.

... I don't want to screw anyone and don't want to be screwed by anyone either, although that's a pretty tough ask with our self-important-self aggrandising-over paid-pollies right now.

Ah so because that's the law it's ok to control who comes to Australia but not control who moves within Australia.

If globalisation won't help with jobs or housing, how are people leaving Tasmania - economic refugees - going to  help with jobs and housing in Qld or WA or SA in mining towns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×