Imperial Japan.
Their solution was annex all of SE Asia and the South Pacific. It was called The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.
Sound familiar?
In Chinese it is called The Belt and Road Initiative.
Posted on 07/09/2021 9:08:00 AM PDT by Rummyfan
Xi Jinping, China’s strongman leader, recently gave a strident speech on the centennial of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party in 1921. Predictably, he focused on achievements of the Party and left out significant blemishes—for example the catastrophic Great Leap Forward in the 1950s, the sanguinary Cultural Revolution from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s, and the suppression of democracy protests in Tiananmen Square in 1989. He also obliquely threatened the interventionism of the United States and the West by saying that foreign powers would “crack their heads and spill blood” if they tried to stop China’s rise. Yet Xi’s bravado hides significant weaknesses that afflict his country.
Ironically, much of the U.S. foreign policy and national security establishment is also using Xi’s speech to help the Chinese leader magnify China’s strengths as a threat to the United States and minimize that country’s weaknesses. What more could a potential adversary ask for? Curiously, in the American political system, interest groups need a potent threat, whether domestic or abroad, to attract public attention and therefore extra cash to their proposed policy program. As during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, the U.S. foreign policy establishment is happy to overstate the threat that China poses to American security while minimizing U.S. strengths and China’s weaknesses.
However, even though the U.S. security establishment inflated the Soviet threat to increase American military spending throughout the Cold War, many at the Pentagon and State Department privately referred to the Soviet Union as “Upper Volta with Missiles,” in a condescending reference to the USSR’s inefficient, creaking, and non-viable communist economy. That economy eventually stagnated and the Soviet political system collapsed as a result. In contrast, in his speech, Xi bragged about all the economic progress that China has made during the Party’s reign...
(Excerpt) Read more at theamericanconservative.com ...
Had there been a second term for President Trump then China would be on the ropes right now.
Of course it is.
Any country that cannot feed itself cannot possibly rule the world.
Now, even the North Korean Government is tell its citizens to grow their own food.
China would be starving if not for the ag exports of the West.
Unfortunately Western leaders are a bunch of complicit pussys who will sell us out for a pittance.
China has:
No ability to feed it’s own citizens without significant imports.
No real ability to mine steel
No real resource for oil or coal
Their waters and lands are increasingly being polluted.
Etc
Etc
Etc
I would agree with you on all points except for coal. China has the fourth largest coal reserves in the world behind Australia, Russia and the US.
yep and the Pearl Harbor of today is a current mystery
Did not know that.
I thought they imported coal from us...
They don’t have to Pearl Harbor us.
They just have to buy our politicians and oligarchs.
But if they do need to Pearl Harbor us, our utilities are horribly vulnerable and will do far more damage than Pearl Harbor did.
Pearl Harbor failed because the Japanese only attacked what we currently had, not our means of replacing it. Destroying our utilities would prevent us from replacing our losses and destroy our logistics completely.
For quite some time I have seen parallels between Mainland China today and Imperial Japan in the 1930’s.
No need for war. Bribing US government is much cheaper and less risky.
The author gives no credit to the US military buildup, e.g. Star Wars, for contributing to the collapse of the Soviet Empire.
Also, he tells us that China is weaker than we think but that we should accommodate it’s inevitable rise.
Don’t worry Xi. The Big Guy has your back.
Author claims China’s has a right to protect itself while it forces non aggressive neighbors into military build up?
How does he think this ends, everybody needs to buy more weapons they’ll never use ?
How can internal political adversaries be that big of a problem when the CCP can just take dissenting thought out when convenient ?
Author’s dismissal of our fears based on population decline and political dissidence also seems like a weak argument.
Why wouldn’t AI and robotics be a substantial replacement? Those don’t need food or coal for heating.
Also seems Chinas economic power would outpace its neighbors in cash and manufacturing abilities, possibly innovation too.
It would seem the longer China is allowed to build up the harder they will be to defeat. They are most certainly behaving like aggressors without the same ethical worries as those countries that surround them.
Would this author argue Chamberlin too was right prior to WW2 ?
Traditionally, China believed that it cycled on a pattern of the five elements, wood, fire, earth, metal, and water. This was an unavoidable cycle to the point where different Emperors were raised from infancy that they needed to typify “their” element. Each new Emperor got a new cycle in order.
In practical terms this meant when an Emperor reflected his element in his actions, everything would go smoothly and all would comply with his orders. However, if he rejected his path, nothing would work, nothing in the system would work and he would get frustrated.
The cycle was much like the seasons. First starting from scratch, then growing and innovating, then mature and running smoothly, then decay, and finally destruction so that they could begin anew with the cycle starting over.
The most notorious Emperors were the water (destruction) ones.
Mao Tse Tung *would* have been a water Emperor, and even though China had become communist, everyone expected Mao to act like a water Emperor. And he did.
Xi Jinping would also have been a water Emperor.
I know they had been importing ‘clean’ coal from Australia until recently when Aussies cut them off. So perhaps they have LOTS of coal which is either not very economical to develop or too dirty even for Chicom standards.
Bkmk
Which is why China and the Globalists stole the election.
Metallurgical coal supply within China is tight after a boycott of Australia.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.