Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

China won't actually become the world's top superpower until every major tech giant is based there and both their citizens and global markets have the kind of spending power we see here in the States. Basically, it’s a non-starter.

If China gets into any kind of real conflict with the West, their growth hits a brick wall immediately.

electrichawk94 said:China won't actually become the world's top superpower until every major tech giant is based there and both their citizens and global markets have the kind of spending power we see here in the States. Basically, it’s a non-starter.

If China gets into any kind of real conflict with the West, their growth hits a brick wall immediately.

They aren't looking for a fight with the West anyway. They aren't Peter the Great; they’ll do just about anything to avoid one. Even he wouldn't be too happy if things dragged on much longer.

I agree. China is effectively the world's manufacturer, and their entire business model relies on that fact. From their perspective, a weakened Russia is actually a win; it provides a steady stream of cheap raw materials they can process into high-end goods for the West, whose economy is driven by consumption. There's a perfect balance between China and the West, and I doubt China will disrupt it since they’re too dependent on the status quo.

China produces, the West buys. By making this reckless move to go to war in Ukraine, Russia has essentially placed itself under China's thumb, becoming nothing more than a supplier of cheap resources. This setup works for both China and the West. Why would China risk a conflict with Russia? They're both nuclear powers—war doesn't make sense. Meanwhile, economic subjugation has been happening for a long time, and this war just pushed it to a new level. Russia will become increasingly dependent on China (and we shouldn't overlook India as a major player here), meaning they'll be conquered without a single shot being fired.

Everyone will feel the fallout from this war, but no matter how you look at it, Russia is the biggest loser in this grand game of chess—aside from the innocent lives lost, of course.

Everything would be different if we didn't have to face the fact that China is constantly encroaching on the West—just like Russia does...
They share a similar systemic structure with Russia, even down to certain key traits and their general mindset.

The real issue lies with all these failing autocratic nations—the ones that immediately pivot toward imperialism the moment they see an opening. And China caught that opening because they lured everyone in with the promise of moving manufacturing over there. It’s turning out to be a massive mistake...

Amanda Allen4 said:There will come a day when China reclaims the territory that Imperial Russia snatched from them. And mark my words, it won't be a full-scale war—it’ll be some "special operation" just like what we're seeing in Ukraine right now.

They won't even need a "special operation." The current average population density in the Russian Far East has already plummeted to just 1.16 people per square kilometer.
Over the next 20 to 30 years, the Chinese will likely find themselves able to peacefully occupy completely empty regions—all without the need for massacring civilians, leveling entire towns, or shelling hospitals and maternity wards.🤷

Jessica Peterson2 said:They won't even need a "special operation." The current average population density in the Russian Far East has already plummeted to just 1.16 people per square kilometer.
Over the next 20 to 30 years, the Chinese will likely find themselves able to peacefully occupy completely empty regions—all without the need for massacring civilians, leveling entire towns, or shelling hospitals and maternity wards.🤷

The real question is how many Chinese people actually make up that 1.16 per km². The only truly problematic variable in this scenario is that birth rates in China are also plummeting, and they are aging at an alarming rate. Decades of the one-child policy, followed by the preference for a specific gender, have exacted a heavy toll. The European Union and the USA address these demographic gaps through immigration, but very few people are looking to move to China.

So, where exactly is the Chinese presence spreading to now? Good grief, they’ve already established two major bases outside of their own territorial waters. 🤣

Nancy Gomez26 said:The real question is how many Chinese people actually make up that 1.16 per km². The only truly problematic variable in this scenario is that birth rates in China are also plummeting, and they are aging at an alarming rate. Decades of the one-child policy, followed by the preference for a specific gender, have exacted a heavy toll. The European Union and the USA address these demographic gaps through immigration, but very few people are looking to move to China.

You're talking as if China is facing a population shortage.

Even if they were cut in half, there still wouldn't be an issue—aside from the overcrowding, of course.

Noah Ward2 said:China is definitely the biggest challenge we face... what's happening in Ukraine is almost trivial compared to the kind of chaos that might come from dealing with them...

Instead of the West trying to strike a deal with Putin over the last 20 years to keep a lid on the Chinese before they became too powerful, they've just let them expand. Meanwhile, they're busy fighting a Cold War with Russia, which isn't even the main player in the global picture anymore...

Now that Putin has finally lost his patience, everyone is panicking... unfortunately, it looks like the big winners in all of this will be the Chinese...

You can't cut a deal with Vladimir Putin; he's simply incapable of it. If he actually could, he would have settled things in Transnistria, Georgia, and Syria by now. It’s pretty obvious the man just doesn't possess the capacity for negotiation.

And it wasn't the West that started this Cold War—it was Putin. For the West, Russia has been a declining power for decades. Americans practically walked away from Europe as a primary zone of interest and shifted their focus toward China back during the Obama administration. If you want proof, look at Canada or Mexico, where the US basically handed everything over to the European Union.
The Russians just pulled them right back in...

The European Commission is set to decide today whether to grant Ukraine candidate status for membership in the EU.
It’s a massive leap from being a candidate to actually joining the club, but this would still be incredibly fast—especially since it would be the first time a country under active war gets candidate status.

William Anderson5 said:You can't cut a deal with Vladimir Putin; he's simply incapable of it. If he actually could, he would have settled things in Transnistria, Georgia, and Syria by now. It’s pretty obvious the man just doesn't possess the capacity for negotiation.

And it wasn't the West that started this Cold War—it was Putin. For the West, Russia has been a declining power for decades. Americans practically walked away from Europe as a primary zone of interest and shifted their focus toward China back during the Obama administration. If you want proof, look at Canada or Mexico, where the US basically handed everything over to the European Union.
The Russians just pulled them right back in...

If I were following pro-Russian logic, I'd say China and NATO are going to fight until the last Russian is gone. But clearly, the Russian invasion of Ukraine served its purpose: it successfully diverted global attention away from China, and quite effectively at that. Does anyone actually remember the formation of AUKUS? Or Biden's statements about how the USA will militarily defend Taiwan? He never once made a similar commitment for Ukraine... if anything, he emphasized that there wouldn't be direct military involvement.

rowdytiger13 said:The European Commission is set to decide today whether to grant Ukraine candidate status for membership in the EU.
It’s a massive leap from being a candidate to actually joining the club, but this would still be incredibly fast—especially since it would be the first time a country under active war gets candidate status.

War or no war, Ukraine really needs this. Without the EU, Ukraine could end up becoming the next Venezuela. Once the fighting stops, the EU could help turn Ukraine into something more like Germany.

rowdytiger13 said:If I were following pro-Russian logic, I'd say China and NATO are going to fight until the last Russian is gone. But clearly, the Russian invasion of Ukraine served its purpose: it successfully diverted global attention away from China, and quite effectively at that. Does anyone actually remember the formation of AUKUS? Or Biden's statements about how the USA will militarily defend Taiwan? He never once made a similar commitment for Ukraine... if anything, he emphasized that there wouldn't be direct military involvement.

The Chinese don't stand a chance near Taiwan right now.
They'd have to move a million—maybe even several million—soldiers over to an island 62 miles far off their coast
and Taiwan actually maintains one of the most modern militaries on the planet.
As it stands, this all feels like a lot of posturing without any actual threat.

Jessica Peterson2 said:They won't even need a "special operation." The current average population density in the Russian Far East has already plummeted to just 1.16 people per square kilometer.
Over the next 20 to 30 years, the Chinese will likely find themselves able to peacefully occupy completely empty regions—all without the need for massacring civilians, leveling entire towns, or shelling hospitals and maternity wards.🤷

And hey, they say there will be fewer Chinese people too.
Even if a massive wave of them migrates there later, that doesn't mean they've suddenly seized control—you still need weapons for that, which means war.

rowdytiger13 said:The European Commission is set to decide today whether to grant Ukraine candidate status for membership in the EU.
It’s a massive leap from being a candidate to actually joining the club, but this would still be incredibly fast—especially since it would be the first time a country under active war gets candidate status.

Giving candidate status to a country where the president has banned the opposition and people are getting taped to the streets... what a joke.

gentlestag15 said:The Chinese don't stand a chance near Taiwan right now.
They'd have to move a million—maybe even several million—soldiers over to an island 62 miles far off their coast
and Taiwan actually maintains one of the most modern militaries on the planet.
As it stands, this all feels like a lot of posturing without any actual threat.

An attack like that would be catastrophic for China. All of Southeast Asia would likely unite against them. Their only real allies would be Pakistan and the Taliban, which would push India firmly into the Western sphere.

It would be an even bigger blunder for China than this one by Vladimir Putin.

gentlestag15 said:The Chinese don't stand a chance near Taiwan right now.
They'd have to move a million—maybe even several million—soldiers over to an island 62 miles far off their coast
and Taiwan actually maintains one of the most modern militaries on the planet.
As it stands, this all feels like a lot of posturing without any actual threat.

If they can't pull off a peaceful integration, force isn't gonna work either.

electrichawk94 said:China won't actually become the world's top superpower until every major tech giant is based there and both their citizens and global markets have the kind of spending power we see here in the States. Basically, it’s a non-starter.

If China gets into any kind of real conflict with the West, their growth hits a brick wall immediately.

The Anglo-Americans shouldn't be barking at China for no reason; they know deep down their military and economic dominance is on its way out.

Now they’re supposedly acting all worried about Taiwan.

That's why they're cooking up things like AUKUS, spreading rumors, making local pacts to surround China—and lately, they've been waging this disgusting propaganda war.

Luckily, we probably won't see those Soros-style color revolutions here. I guess Chinese people aren't some easy targets like they were in Eastern Europe.

Noah Sanchez2 said:I agree. China is effectively the world's manufacturer, and their entire business model relies on that fact. From their perspective, a weakened Russia is actually a win; it provides a steady stream of cheap raw materials they can process into high-end goods for the West, whose economy is driven by consumption. There's a perfect balance between China and the West, and I doubt China will disrupt it since they’re too dependent on the status quo.

China produces, the West buys. By making this reckless move to go to war in Ukraine, Russia has essentially placed itself under China's thumb, becoming nothing more than a supplier of cheap resources. This setup works for both China and the West. Why would China risk a conflict with Russia? They're both nuclear powers—war doesn't make sense. Meanwhile, economic subjugation has been happening for a long time, and this war just pushed it to a new level. Russia will become increasingly dependent on China (and we shouldn't overlook India as a major player here), meaning they'll be conquered without a single shot being fired.

Everyone will feel the fallout from this war, but no matter how you look at it, Russia is the biggest loser in this grand game of chess—aside from the innocent lives lost, of course.

I was watching some analysis by Peter Schiff where he argues that the West isn't really buying from China so much as they're just borrowing. He was specifically talking about the USA. His point is that since that debt is never actually going to be repaid, it doesn't really matter if these two sides keep dragging each other down into a recession; the end result is pretty much the same.

Paul Thomas46 said:You're talking as if China is facing a population shortage.

Even if they were cut in half, there still wouldn't be an issue—aside from the overcrowding, of course.

Believe it or not, China really does have a major issue with a shrinking youth population. That’s actually why they finally scrapped the one-child policy.

Nicholas Watson said:I was watching some analysis by Peter Schiff where he argues that the West isn't really buying from China so much as they're just borrowing. He was specifically talking about the USA. His point is that since that debt is never actually going to be repaid, it doesn't really matter if these two sides keep dragging each other down into a recession; the end result is pretty much the same.

China is leaning into globalization, so I don't see any massive conflict or war coming down the pike.

That's one way to look at it... but China is just a player in a much bigger game. (And you can't exactly quit the game—you just play.)

Russ, if you've been following along, is telling a completely different story.
Just the same old tale from centuries ago.

By the way—this example pretty much explains it all—the Russian auto industry is basically regressing to 80s tech.
Meanwhile, China... yeah.