”The ideological fight with the Soviet Union was a new type of conflict but was "within the Western family," which allowed for some dialogue and eventually Moscow's agreement to the 1975 Helsinki Final Act. Those accords included human rights provisions that Skinner said "opened the door really to undermine the Soviet Union, the totalitarian state, on human rights principles." What set off pro-China academics and pundits were Skinner's comment that similar dialogue and openings are not possible with China. "This is a fight with a really different civilization and a different ideology—and the United States hasn't had that before, nor has it had an economic competitor the way that we have," she said. "So in China we have an economic competitor, we have an ideological competitor, one that really does seek a kind of global reach that many of us didn't expect a couple of decades ago, and I think it's also striking that it's the first time that we will have a great power competitor that is not Caucasian."
I remember in 1992 one of my history professors claimed Japan was our greatest threat. And that Japan would eventually defeat us without ever using a bullet.
Now they say it’s China. I do think China is a greater threat. Mainly, because 90% of their country is used to suffering, starving, and being poor.
The US population is soft and spoiled.
Concerning the opening post, after watching Chernobyl, I don’t think I trust North Korea to handle any radiation in a safe way. So them testing bombs 16 times bigger than Hiroshima is a scary thought.
Out in the middle of the ocean, or not.