Submitted by Gari_305 t3_z7utpw in Futurology
Comments
KileiFedaykin t1_iy8reas wrote
This. The capabilities and build quality of their tech is way behind ours. Also, this is isn’t including the personnel experience and expertise that they can’t simply download and utilize.
A high tech tool, assuming they even had our real tech, is only as good as it’s operators and leaders.
hectichead22 t1_iy97dni wrote
One undeniable fact about China (and Japan) is they've always been very good at taking an invention from somewhere else tweaking it and churning them out at a fraction of the cost at a greater speed. (You seen those guys building a hospital)? "Operators" I agree with but they're not short of people but leaders is irrelevant if you've many many more of something than an enemy even if the few they have are superior crafts. Remembers Hitler 🤔. "Tech" you bet they have and things we haven't (as do we).
Fausterion18 t1_iya41vf wrote
Lol you just described 19th and early 20th century America. One of our greatest heroes and one of Britain's greatest villains is Samuel Slater who stole a bunch of British technology for America. Until after WW1(and for some technologies WW2), the flow of technology was pretty much one way from Europe to the US. Americans stole, cheated, and bought their way into technological dominance. Helped by the two massive wars fought in Europe and the Nazis getting rid of all their top scientific minds.
> Samuel Slater (June 9, 1768 – April 21, 1835) was an early English-American industrialist known as the "Father of the American Industrial Revolution" (a phrase coined by Andrew Jackson) and the "Father of the American Factory System". In the UK, he was called "Slater the Traitor"
hectichead22 t1_iya55ff wrote
Yea.. but tell that to GI fkn Joe who's confident of western superiority warfare. I dread to think what China have been playing around with that we have no fucking idea of because... We haven't seen it! WTF! That's just seriously dumb in my book. Look at how powerful Japan and Germany have become after "loosing the war" and having had a ban on becoming nuclear powers. If people think they've not invested in other as of yet unknown tech then I think they're very naive.
LastCall2021 t1_iybevd1 wrote
Someone’s naive… but it’s not the people you think.
nreis1992 t1_iybrmru wrote
For real, I think a very hard look at the War in Ukraine should be in order.
A nation, perceived to be a superpower with crazy capabilities, exposed as a paper tiger with a few good tricks.
The Germans, wrapped up in their own bureaucratic mess and seemingly shrugging their way through.
The Japanese whose focus is balance never escalation.
And western old school non-networked weapon systems showing strong results.
I think the media(mostly fiction) has made us fear future war concepts. I don’t think nations are really capable of doing it for one reason or another (another being progressive escalation to MAD)
In the end, always assume their nukes will work.
KileiFedaykin t1_iy9g0h9 wrote
When our optimal striking distance is further than their operational viewing distance, they don't stand a chance. I'm sure we can manufacture more arms than they can build functional strike craft. The gap in capabilities is very distant.
Also, leadership is very relevant. If they don't understand how to best utilize what they have, the numbers will fall apart very quickly and make little to no difference. You can't just throw numbers of craft in the air and expect to achieve air superiority.
hectichead22 t1_iy9gvb6 wrote
Sorry I didn't realize that they don't have any blocking technology or satellite tech. I'm guessing no hi tech weapons in the hand-gliders that they call airplanes. I definitely need to get up to scratch on what they don't have. You got any reliable links for that info please.
KileiFedaykin t1_iy9rw29 wrote
They do have both on that. I'm not saying they don't have capable tech, we just have better and it is better where it counts. What China really lacks manufacturing-wise is the ability to create complex microprocessors other finely engineered technology. They may be getting better, but they still rely on other countries for these products and building this infrastructure is very difficult and takes a long time to implement. Time will tell in this area.
They still need to be taken seriously, and I guarantee you that our military is clearly doing that. Air superiority is one that that our military will ensure we are the best at as it is the keystone to our military doctrine.
Satellites are not useful for coordinating live-combat engagements due to information lag. Where our known capabilities today lie are in our ability to use in-theater radar systems to see far enough away for our carrier groups to target and respond first and further away than the currently known capabilities of the current Chinese carrier groups. This is massive. Unless we are unable to counter similar advancement from the Chinese, that would put them at par with us at best.
hectichead22 t1_iy9uw20 wrote
You got any reliable links to your claims please.. I'm no military expert. You seem confident in USA superiority (I'd expect no different). However I think it's foolish to poopoo Chinas capabilities based on what you don't know they have. If you seriously think that "satellites are no good for coordinating real time combat" I suggest you go eMail Elon musk and the Ukrainian military and tell them they're on a loosing streak.
KileiFedaykin t1_iya0yw3 wrote
I agree that I am very confident in US military superiority. I've just have yet to be shown otherwise. I'm not trying to necessarily "poopoo" on China's capabilities because I feel that China is stupid or incompetent. I simply don't believe they have had the necessary long-term experience in this level of military system refinement.
Also, on the satellite front; to my knowledge, no one has satellites that are capable of sending video of a combat engagement to be used for live tactics. Not even in Ukraine. Also, the Elon Musk satellites (Starlink) are data satellites, not imaging satellites.
hectichead22 t1_iyadjo2 wrote
You got any reliable links to your claims please.
KileiFedaykin t1_iycy2ib wrote
Military capability speculation is very hard to verify. I can only offer my opinions gained from a variety of reported conflicts and talking with the service members I know. They have articles expounding the capabilities of the different units and some youtube videos I've watched that describe the use of the variety of units.
Sorry that I cannot provide reliable articles on what is controlled and propagandized data. I'm merely providing my opinion on what I believe.
hectichead22 t1_iyd3kjj wrote
Fair enough, and that's my point. I'm sure that all countries have propaganda machines in operation and exactly zero of those countries would be saying what they don't have and any other countries that are saying such things are saying so out of pure speculation and for propaganda reasons. I'm trying to imagine a western country discovering that China had made some sort of secret mega weapon. The daddy of all weapons, and the likelihood of that country telling it's population of the discovery.
Havana syndrome for example.
KileiFedaykin t1_iyewapm wrote
I had to look up Havana Syndrome. I knew of the event, but hadn't heard the term. TIL
PerfectPercentage69 t1_iyca4lk wrote
>(You seen those guys building a hospital)?
You mean the one that's started leaking and falling apart within a few months? China might have the speed and price in building something, but the quality is still crap.
hectichead22 t1_iycq0sg wrote
I used it to illustrate the point. Almost all of our appliances and electrical goods are made in China. I think it a mistake to judge everything about China on an aged stereotype that everything they make is cheap and defective. It's not.
ResolutionShoddy9171 t1_iycnrad wrote
Please do mind that China has a massive choking point that is oil. If you have to import a enormoust percentage of a usefull resource for war, you are extremelly vulnerable. Especially if said resource has to come by boat and your opponent has the biggest and far better fleet.
hectichead22 t1_iyd05vk wrote
Hmnn.. a good point ☝️ but 😂😂😂.
Isn't Russian connected by land to China? They (Russia) are the third and fourth (China) largest oil producers in the world. Both from within their own borders. The only current supplier of oil that would require a boat for delivery is from Brazil who supply only 6% of China's imported Oil (and possibly Angola). The rest are connected by land and easily accessible.
China's Top Providers of Imported Crude Oil
Saudi Arabia: US$39.9 billion (17.4% of China's crude oil imports)
Russia: $35.8 billion (15.6%)
Iraq: $23.5 billion (10.2%)
Oman: $20.2 billion (8.8%)
Angola: $17.3 billion (7.5%)
Kuwait: $14.1 billion (6.2%)
United Arab Emirates: $14 billion (6.1%)
Brazil: $13.8 billion (6%)
JustAKarmaWhore t1_iy98qr5 wrote
Yeah, and I bet those 'hospitals' will probably topple over at a slight breeze in the wind, or after a few years when whatever fake material they used to build it starts to degrade.
There's constant building collapses in china of buildings literally just falling over so yeah, you can build stuff pretty fast and cheap if you dont care about the reliability or quality of the product.
I highly doubt China has anything that is 'better' compared to what the US has.
hectichead22 t1_iy9fhxz wrote
Cheap and disposable yes, then just build another. It's a great way to keep your population employed. "Better things compared to the US" .. how about artificially built islands out in the ocean, with runways on? You almost make it sound like they live in paper houses, don't wear shoes and all paddle around in paddy fields.
YourWiseOldFriend t1_iya1zm6 wrote
>Cheap and disposable yes, then just build another.
They've built entire cities just for investment purposes that few if any people live in. Then there's the buildings they started building that were never finished and then demolished.
It is a humongous waste of resources and a blot on the landscape to have all that housing just standing there, without maintenance or upkeep, just falling apart.
This is not a smart way to build things. Their buildings do collapse. It's easy to say 'build another one', but you know: there were people in those buildings when the collapsed. Is that not something to worry about? That the standards are so lax and are ignored with impunity that you're going to live in a building that is going to collapse at some point and you may, or may not be in that building at the time?
hectichead22 t1_iya3zjy wrote
I think we've strayed somewhat from the point of the discussion. What has that got to do with 3d printed airplanes that fire rockets?
CathodeRayNoob t1_iy9mf8y wrote
Something something “if you want to create jobs, give them spoons, not shovels”
MilkshakeBoy78 t1_iy9vilb wrote
why spoons and not shovels?
CathodeRayNoob t1_iy9zrqe wrote
>This quotation is usually coupled with a colorful anecdote, but the details of the stories vary greatly. Here is an account from the economics writer Stephen Moore that was printed in the Wall Street Journal in 2009. Moore stated that he used to visit Milton Friedman and his wife, and together they would dine at a favorite Chinese restaurant: [2]
>At one of our dinners, Milton recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton replied: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.”
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/10/10/spoons-shovels
>Cheap and disposable yes, then just build another. It's a great way to keep your population employed
Labor should be necessary and fulfilling. Not arbitrarily maximized.
The worst part about cheering for a cheap and disposable design is that there is still a pilot in that jet. China might find it's pilot's disposable but America doesn't have the same notion of its' pilots.
hectichead22 t1_iyad6wi wrote
🤣🤣🤣 you ever been in the army/navy/ air force?
Anyway.. back to the point in question which seems to be that USA great.. China weak..
Nothing going on with all those space rockets and things. It's just to get good photos for the internet. China don't have anything we should worry about after they split from the international space program. They just want to have a little gander on there own. Lmfao. Jeesssusfk people have nothing, have confidence in there government to PROtect them.. and are happy.
Bobtheguardian22 t1_iyagx3n wrote
how have they not been able to
A. acquire blueprints.
B. train talent.
Specific_Main3824 t1_iycuvwh wrote
Sooooooo wrong lol.
KileiFedaykin t1_iycxge5 wrote
Care to elaborate?
MyBallsAreOnFir3 t1_iyc3vpx wrote
Of course the comments had to make it a dick measuring contest with America. Do you guys ever get tired of feeling constantly under attack at the mere mention of the word "China"?
CathodeRayNoob t1_iyd9ftf wrote
When someone posts blatant propaganda; it should be met with facts.
That’s all that happened here. 3D printing is not “advanced manufacturing” for aerospace components.
dissident_right t1_iybissl wrote
Lol this cope. I'm sure the planes that China is producing in 2023 will be no better than the ones LHM produced in 1990. Sure.
My entire life useful idiots like /u/KileiFedaykin have been playing down the technological and economic strength of China ("Handing over HK will be the beginnings of Chinese Democracy!", "The Asian Tiger is going to go into recession!", "This housing market slump is the end of Chinese growth!"), every time they end up looking foolish.
CathodeRayNoob t1_iyblaya wrote
I'm referring to the use of 3d printing in mass production.
Mass production of modern jet fighters is dozens of units; not millions. 3d printing has been cheaper than tooling for various parts for decades.
I'm not necessarily knocking the Chinese; they are masters at traditional tooling and manufacturing in ways we simply don't have the talent base to replicate. But for the same reasons, we are decades ahead in additive manufacturing and Uncle Sam only knows how far ahead in aerospace technology.
I'm more knocking the headline that 3d printing is new or advanced in the field of aero defense.
KileiFedaykin t1_iycyqer wrote
Funny how you peg me as a useful idiot and then apply quotes that I've never said and very much disagree with. China is the most prominent competitor to the US in military capability and the US military will need to ensure it continues to advance and prepare for potential conflicts with China.
The track record I've seen from what China has built has not convinced me that they have the ability to seriously threaten US battle groups in open combat. China is certainly pushing to advance and expand their navy, but it hasn't happened yet, so it is an unknown. Their current navy doesn't seem to live up to the propaganda from what I hear.
These are just my opinions because I haven't seen anything to convince me otherwise, but I am always open to learn.
Specific_Main3824 t1_iycuss0 wrote
I'm not a Chinese person or a CCP 50-cent army member. Im just an Aussie. I can guarantee you China is already more advanced than the US and the US military. They don't have all the state-of-the-art ships built yet, but they have started building them. 5 years, and China will have more military than every other nation combined, and right now It's already more advanced.
PopeHonkersVII t1_iy8xmk6 wrote
After seeing myth vs reality with Russian military equipment and technology, I suspect that China's boasting is nothing more than empty propaganda.
hectichead22 t1_iy97uoo wrote
Hard to tell really, they seem to get the attention of other world leaders whenever they speak. That's not an indication of an impotent country. You got a link?
Timbershoe t1_iy9a8df wrote
The general feeling on China is that they are not building an offensive military, it’s designed as a deterrent, force projection and status symbol:
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/chinas-hollow-military/
That’s largely born out of the fact that, aside from some border conflicts, China doesn’t involve itself in wars. China is only interested in what it perceives as Chinese territory, and that would be the land and waters historically under control of China. That has been true of China for over a thousand years.
The US, as a comparison, is almost wholly offensive in nature. It’s built to win wars, and often engages in them. The US is not involved in border disputes, but wars on the other side of the world.
China does not appear to be interested in a war, it has no reason to. And the military reflects that, all show and little substance.
So while China absolutely has the ability to create a powerful military, what it’s actually created isn’t all that effective for a modern conflict.
But it makes good news to play up the China threat. They certainly talk the talk, even if in reality they show no sign of offence military plans.
hectichead22 t1_iy9ex7z wrote
Who needs a competent invading military force when you got those big explodey things? You're right on with your points about America and it's lucrative involvement in continuous wars and China's focus being more insular than invasive other than economically. I think that the argument that my guns bigger than your gun becomes obsolete when both are holding enough explosives to wipe out all living existence of the planet. Which of course both do, many times over.
Fausterion18 t1_iya51u6 wrote
It's readily obvious that the Chinese military is incapable of any large scale offensives. It hasn't invested into the massive scale logistics required for such a task and its military procurement is focused on increasing its technology base rather than deployment.
There's constantly stories about this new Chinese weapon or that new Chinese weapon, but how many of these new weapons do they actually buy? Compare how many J-20s China has to how many F-35s the US is buying and you have your answer.
Not to mention every now and then the PLA actually gets deployed for disaster relief and so far its been a logistical shit show. They couldn't even feed their troops and the troops had to rely on locals for food.
hectichead22 t1_iyag0yw wrote
You make the mistake of thinking military might is judged on the willingness to invade other countries and show what you have and profiteering off selling weapons that you make for yourselves to other countries. China dosn't do that as far as I know. It doesn't mean they don't make them, they maybe just keep them. THEY DONT GET INVOLVED IN THE UNSAVOURY BUISNESSES OF PROFITEERING FROM WAR. Unlike USA, France and the UK who have it as possibly one of the most profitable economic investments. It's just Dumb with a capital D to judge the capability of China from the blinkered standpoint of a western cultural value system. DUMB!
I learned today that the USA tested nuclear bombs on the bikini Islands after the war at a rate of one a day for 12 years. Do the math. Kinda makes me wonder what the countries that weren't causing the global warming shitshow we have today we're doing since 1946 in regards of technology and advancing weapons. Just cos you haven't seen them dosnt mean they don't exist. Not all country's are so keen to be warmongers and display there shit like ... Well... The west.
hatefulreason t1_iy9c58z wrote
building some artificial islands and military bases in their surrounding countries will convince them of our peaceful nature
PacJeans t1_iy992cf wrote
Besides, why is how a part is manufactured a matter of importance.
We have a high tech, experienced army. We don't even machine our parts anymore!
[deleted] t1_iyb98e6 wrote
[removed]
uasoil123 t1_iy8sk9f wrote
Oh boy oh boy oh boy....has the new Ender v9 come out already?!?!?!
cesium-sandwich t1_iy93qyr wrote
Spots that red bomb bay door... "Hey I have that same filament!"
Gari_305 OP t1_iy86oqh wrote
From the Article
>"We are applying 3D printing technologies on aircraft on a large scale at an engineering level, and we are in a world-leading position," Doctor Li Xiaodan, a member of the Luo Yang Youth Commando at Shenyang Aircraft Company's craft research institute, told China Central Television (CCTV) on Saturday.
>
>This is partially due to a growing demand for planes that has seen traditional manufacturing reach a ceiling in 2013. These new and advanced 3D printing techniques are now enabling the production of new planes with high structural strength, long service life, low cost of production and fast manufacturing.
[deleted] t1_iy8ug31 wrote
[deleted]
2nd_mars_revolution t1_iy8xqml wrote
About time they caught up. The US has been doing stuff like that since the 2000s or before.
Various-Specific-773 t1_iy9cbgi wrote
Funny. We are phasing out the f22 and they are just now making there bootleg copy.
[deleted] t1_iy9e6yb wrote
[deleted]
FuturologyBot t1_iy8ax7b wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
From the Article
>"We are applying 3D printing technologies on aircraft on a large scale at an engineering level, and we are in a world-leading position," Doctor Li Xiaodan, a member of the Luo Yang Youth Commando at Shenyang Aircraft Company's craft research institute, told China Central Television (CCTV) on Saturday.
>
>This is partially due to a growing demand for planes that has seen traditional manufacturing reach a ceiling in 2013. These new and advanced 3D printing techniques are now enabling the production of new planes with high structural strength, long service life, low cost of production and fast manufacturing.
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/z7utpw/china_is_now_using_advanced_3dprinting_tech_in/iy86oqh/
LeftOnQuietRoad t1_iy8cnzn wrote
“Ok. I’m going to commit. I’m gonna get a Ender 3 Pro. I’m gonna tinkercad.”
[deleted] t1_iy8kxts wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iy8l9c2 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iy8lztr wrote
[removed]
OldHobbitsDieHard t1_iy8no7u wrote
What's the big spikey stick at the front? For kebabing enemy planes?
[deleted] t1_iy8txj3 wrote
[deleted]
Blakut t1_iy8u0ef wrote
interesting that there are now big protests in china we see these posts on here more and more. Way to go Xi!
[deleted] t1_iy8x3v2 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iy92buk wrote
[removed]
RBzoner1 t1_iy9k0dc wrote
its nice to see other nations catching up to 90's tech. LMartian has been producing equipment like this for a while.
​
This is where the US was 2 yrs ago
​
​
we are at currently at this stage;
[deleted] t1_iy9rkbz wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iya0ldc wrote
[removed]
Galaxy999 t1_iyam4yw wrote
Promoting China/Russia military technologies is the way military complex here to ask congress for more tax payers money. All money driven moves…
[deleted] t1_iyb23uw wrote
Cool. Do they watch reruns of Lost and The Sopranos while waiting for things to print? Maybe post some cool MIDI versions of theme songs on MySpace? Cuz it's obviously not 2022 as I was led to believe.
[deleted] t1_iyb3vm6 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iyb5p6l wrote
[removed]
cloudsofconfusion t1_iyb82ls wrote
Better headline. China in 2022 discovers 1991 New age tech.
The CCP is destroying China. Support the Chinese people by destroying the CCP.
[deleted] t1_iyc41rx wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_iycbx06 wrote
[removed]
_baundiesel_ t1_iy8irc1 wrote
China is building a giant paper tiger army. They're completely untested and none of their military doctrine has ever been tested. I have no doubt that technically China has military worth respecting but I have zero faith they can conduct a large military operation against any comparable force and win.
[deleted] t1_iyb9en0 wrote
[removed]
ProShortKingAction t1_iy8zpgd wrote
No country on this scale can do a large military operation against any comparable force. It'll lead to nuclear war and the annihilation of both parties if not everyone
hectichead22 t1_iy98abd wrote
Hence America and it's smaller proxy wars.
_baundiesel_ t1_iy93re0 wrote
I don't necessarily mean comparable in size but in capability. I don't think China can really take on Taiwan especially with the direct support they get from Western partners similar to what we've seen with Ukraine. Having no officers or leadership who know how to conduct war will make it very costly no matter how advanced you are.
ProShortKingAction t1_iy94ob1 wrote
That makes a lot more sense, apologies. I've been seeing a weirdly large amount of talk of "oh insert Nation with nuclear weapons here should watch out they can't handle insert nation with nuclear weapons here" like this generation has fully forgotten that these weapons even exist. I thought you were probably referring to the increased tensions between the U.S. and China or China and India
johnmatrix84 t1_iy9b0u1 wrote
A big problem for the Chinese military is the fact that they are controlled by the authoritarian Communist Party. They have political officers whose job is to enforce loyalty to the Party and its ideology. One of the primary stated goals of the military is to keep the Party in power. Shit like this causes a significant reduction in combat readiness/effectiveness, due to time and effort that could've been used on improving the military instead being spent on ensuring compliance with the Party's political ideas and constant lying to cover your ass so the secret police don't make you disappear. Historical examples are abundant - the Soviet Union before, during and after WWII, Russia after the Cold War, Iraq during the Gulf War and the 2003 US invasion, etc.
I remember reading a report from an Iraqi officer who was in charge of a motor pool or something. They had a bunch of Humvee or Jeep-equivalent trucks, and most of them didn't work because they'd broken down and the Iraqis couldn't get spare parts for them. One of Saddam's sons was going to be conducting an inspection, so the officer made sure every vehicle looked clean and had a fresh coat of paint - to make it look like they were well-maintained. Saddam's son arrived for the inspection, and he wanted to start up one of the vehicles. The one he picked didn't run. The officer expected to be arrested, but instead Saddam's son told him to keep it quiet, since he'd already lied and told Saddam that the vehicles were all in perfect condition.
RBzoner1 t1_iy9l2f5 wrote
its sorta like what would a dog do with the car bumper he's chasing,
case in point they're looking for experienced fighter pilots to teach their pilots how to fly the new toys they are building
PacJeans t1_iy99ise wrote
A paper tiger with a billion people, nuclear weapons, a state run propaganda machine, and a bad habit of excalating any conflict.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy8lhwq wrote
So China should go find some middle eastern country to invade and occupy like the US does?
SatanLifeProTips t1_iy8ms4v wrote
China doesn’t do war on foreign soil. They simply buy their way in.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy97q3n wrote
Which leaves a much better impression on these countries than invading and occupying them.
PacJeans t1_iy99v15 wrote
The US and China are both imperialistic. They are not mutually exclusive, you can call out both.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy9a9rp wrote
Why don't you ask ME and African countries about their views on China vs the west.
seasamgo t1_iy9cwrn wrote
Considering the vastly differing histories of the many people that "ME and Africa countries" incorporates, as well as "the West," you'll really have to narrow it down further for anything remotely accurate.
Regardless, imperialism is generally bad for anyone that isn't part of the country imposing imperialism. Both China and the US are imperialistic and both should be called out for their behavior when they hurt or take advantage of others.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy9defl wrote
Sure, if you put China's investing and building infrastructure in developing nations at the same level as US and NATO's invasions and occupations. But people with braincells would disagree.
seasamgo t1_iy9fxk8 wrote
Nobody was doing that, China isn't only investing, and Western countries aren't only invading/occupying. But a 10 second look at your comment history makes it clear that you're a shill so have a wonderful day.
SatanLifeProTips t1_iy9nd13 wrote
China uses brains and trickery. America uses brawn and strong arm tactics.
PacJeans t1_iy9x9jw wrote
Genuinely braindead comment. Do you call genocide of uyghurs trickery? Is it not a strong arm tactic to threaten Taiwan with invasion every week? You could go on and on. But sure China's clever and just doing business. If that's what you want to call predatory loans and imperialistic exploitation in Africa and Asia.
You also just reinforced what I said. America uses military power for its imperialism and China uses economic exploitation, "trickery" as you call it. But somehow China's imperialism is better? This isn't some utilitarian argument where we have to qualify the suffering each countries policies produce. They both exploit, and if either one can do it more, they will.
SatanLifeProTips t1_iy9y7mv wrote
That’s either going on IN China or in land China considers their own. The comment distinctly referenced foreign soil. Yes Taiwan is a touchy subject and calling that foreign or not is like having the correct answer for abortion or religion in government. I’m going to NOPE on that one.
Go look up China’s Belt and Road initiative. They are loaning poor countries billions for mega projects and pumping up how much it will help their economy. But they use mostly Chinese labour and then when the bills come due and the economic benefit never happened they take the project as their own. Check out the assorted sea ports like in Sri Lanka that China scooped up.
That right there is invasion through trickery, and how China is building foreign bases.
hectichead22 t1_iy98073 wrote
I think you hit a nerve.
SCWthrowaway1095 t1_iy8vcte wrote
No, they’ll just invade a sovereign country like Tibet and then pretend it was a part of their country the whole time.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy8wuvg wrote
Lol Tibet has been part of China since ancient times, look at maps of the Qing dynasty.
Somebody0184 t1_iy8yy6s wrote
If you count 1720 as ancient. Prior ownership doesn't equate to legitimacy anyway.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy90hbr wrote
So China has more right to Tibet than America has the right to exist, since they controlled Tibet for longer than the US's existence. That I can agree with.
[deleted] t1_iy96chx wrote
[removed]
Somebody0184 t1_iy9alab wrote
I didn't mention America, what are you talking about.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy9auvx wrote
I'm just applying your logic consistently to another scenario to show you how idiotic your argument is.
Somebody0184 t1_iybmxuc wrote
Your argument doesn't make sense, you seem to think that prior ownership and the length of time equate to legitimacy, not the will of the people who live there. For example, the people of Taiwan don't want to be part of China, which is what gives their state legitimacy.
Yumewomiteru t1_iybnn9k wrote
Oh please tell me about how the people of Tibet are just dying to lose their support from and access to the second largest economy in the world so they can go back to slaving away under serfdom.
Hypotheticall t1_iy9eat8 wrote
How imbecile your argument is? oof.
Somebody0184 t1_iy9aytl wrote
Ok I just looked at your post history since I had a sneaking suspicion you were on r/sino and low and behold I was right.
[deleted] t1_iy9tq3o wrote
Just wait until they send their army somewhere in the middle east or Africa because their belt & road workers keep getting killed.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy9w6jg wrote
WDYM China already has security firms tasked with protecting their overseas assets.
[deleted] t1_iy9wi0f wrote
Yumewomiteru t1_iy9wxk1 wrote
Yeah just because rare attacks succeeded doesn't mean these firms don't exist.
[deleted] t1_iyadmap wrote
Lol! Read the articles.
_baundiesel_ t1_iy8mqv7 wrote
No? They already do that in their own country it seems. Occupations of places with only insurgencies aren't the experience I'm talking about.
Yumewomiteru t1_iy981o7 wrote
>Occupations of places with only insurgencies aren't the experience I'm talking about.
Which is the only experience the US has in recent decades, and judging by Afghanistan they didn't learn much.
_baundiesel_ t1_iy9act3 wrote
Just casually ignoring 2 wars with Iraq. lol
Yumewomiteru t1_iy9ao0v wrote
Yes, the US devastated Iraq and left millions of innocent Iraqis in utter destitution, I'm sure that is something to be proud of.
[deleted] t1_iy8azqk wrote
[removed]
SatanLifeProTips t1_iy8n1ko wrote
China’s tech is rocketing ahead. Without a need to worry about patent infringement they can simply continue to evolve tech to work as good as possible. Our patent system needs to be drastically overhauled and patents need to be shortened to 5-7 years. 2-3 years for software patents.
cesium-sandwich t1_iy93kj3 wrote
As good as possible = as visually similar to the original as possible (without close inspection), but way shittier and cheaper.
rocketing ahead = as they demolish their cities made of actual cardboard and sold to rural "investors" in a lottery involving free chickens.
SatanLifeProTips t1_iy9oegg wrote
Have you actually seen the mew machine tools China is spitting out? A friend of mine has purchased a CNC laser for $50k from china that will cut 1” plate all day long. I’m talking full machine in an enclosure and everything.
They also picked up a 1.5kW fibre laser for 3K for another CNC project.
If your view of what China is pumping out is the garbage they sell on Aliexpress, you are a fool. Try going to some trade shows or maybe go to China and see the industrial stuff first hand. Their equipment is getting to be just as good as the American machine tools for 1/4 the price.
This is exactly like in the late 70’s early 80’s when everyone LOL’d at ‘Jap scrap’. And they kept laughing through the 80’s while they didn’t notice it was getting better and cheaper than the domestically produced products. Then one day whoopsie. We got our asses handed to us.
Cars too. If you think Chinese cars are junk you had go better wander down to the local Volvo dealership and test drive a Polestar. It’s actually a Geele electric car that is better than anything the domestics are making. Did I mention China bought Volvo? China is also already making a lot of the electric driveline components in current EV’s.
cesium-sandwich t1_iy9ssxy wrote
Yeah I thought about getting one of those cheap chinese laser cutters, but I was worried about getting my eyeballs burnt out since they have a questionable safety interlocks.. I read a few horror stories.. but I'll definitely hit you up if I'm in that market, u/SatanLifeProTips.
SatanLifeProTips t1_iy9uvwi wrote
There you go shopping on aliexpress again.
I’m talking professional grade fully enclosed machine tools. Same as you would see in any professional fabrication shop.
You get what you pay for. When you see a shitty laser cutter with no enclosure, that is what you are getting.
cesium-sandwich t1_iya53u2 wrote
Hehe all good bro. I didn't have "Talking about laser cutters with a China simp on the futurology sub" on my bingo card today, but here we are.
fwiw the one I looked at a couple years ago was an enclosed c02 laser, I think a k40.. but I don't even have a workshop, lol.
It wasn't on aliexpress.. it was some weird chinese factory..
I'll see if I can dig it up, and post back.
SatanLifeProTips t1_iyb42qd wrote
Co2 is dying. It’s all about fibre lasers now. The cost of operation per hour is drastically better. You’ll see the CO2 laser market start to VHS over the next couple of years as the smaller and smaller fibre lasers get stupid cheap.
And I may have to make a fibre module add on for my plasma table. Because wow. $3k for that 1.5kW fibre laser is hard to argue with.
CathodeRayNoob t1_iy8pr0p wrote
Alternate headline:
China catches up to early 1990s Lockheed Martin manufacturing techniques.