You forgot to mention Russia. And how much money we are lending them and China.
You forgot to mention Russia. And how much money we are lending them and China.
Do you mean we lend money to the Russians?(The Communists)"Imagine". That's news to me!You mean we Borrow money from the Communist China then Lend it to Communist Russian?That takes the cake of the Latest administrations, all i know is USA has a Debt of trillions of dollars to Communist China, so much so that USA is tied up by the balls and it's going to be hard to enforce regulations on free trade deals with china.
Last edited:
Meghan54
Lifer
- Oct 18, 2009
- 11,684
- 5,228
- 136
Who holds U.S. debt? The top holder by far is U.S. citizens and American entities, such as state and local governments, pension funds, mutual funds, and the Federal Reserve. Together they own the vast majority -- 67.5% -- of the debt.
China holds $1.3T of our debt, or roughly 7%.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/10/news/economy/us-debt-ownership/
Who holds U.S. debt? The top holder by far is U.S. citizens and American entities, such as state and local governments, pension funds, mutual funds, and the Federal Reserve. Together they own the vast majority -- 67.5% -- of the debt.
China holds $1.3T of our debt, or roughly 7%.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/10/news/economy/us-debt-ownership/
Yeah we know
That's not information frankramiro gets from his news sources however.
It still amazes me how much I hear the 'china owns us!' line. It's easy to find information on the federal debt with google. That makes me wonder if far too many people don't really use the internet, as in looking for information in a variety of places, including new ones, but instead just visit a set of websites they have bookmarked. And only adding to that list when a new site meets the 'approval' of the others. :|
Douglas Feith, one of the architects of the "flawed intelligence" used to justify the invasion of Iraq?
My goodness... I can't imagine what he wants.
You're arguing both sides. Trump says to dump our allies if they won't pay up the way we want. Neocons claim we should rush to defend parts of the world like Georgia & Ukraine from their own stupidity in dealing with Russia even though they're not allies
So what kind of freedumb are we talking about, anyway? Are we running an alliance or an extortion racket?
I must admit that question occurred to me as I was reading this thread, given some of the responses.
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
yeah we know
that's not information frankramiro gets from his news sources however.
It still amazes me how much i hear the 'china owns us!' line. It's easy to find information on the federal debt with google. That makes me wonder if far too many people don't really use the internet, as in looking for information in a variety of places, including new ones, but instead just visit a set of websites they have bookmarked. And only adding to that list when a new site meets the 'approval' of the others. :|
Man if you take your info from CNN you are screwed cause CNN is a propaganda of Obama/ crooked Hilary,besides everything since Clinton to Obama/crooked Hilary/CNN administrations are based on lies all lies, nobody believe them any more ,Remember Chemical Weapons in Irak,Invasion and destruction of a Country,so any information from your Rigged crooked Clinton's/Bushes/Obama/Hilary all lies,lies, so don't come here with crooked distorted Charts of American Debt to China,cause nobody will believe you.
Even If i believe your F***** chart of Debts to China to be 1.3 trillions, even thought you and your f**** establishment administrations of Clinton/Bush/Obama/Crooked Hilary should be ashamed of yourselves to borrow even a nickle to Communist china,again f**** turds.
Last edited:
Gosh, imagine the Euros having to actually haul their own freight. The horrors.
The liberal utopias might have to be...adjusted to reality.
The liberal utopias might have to be...adjusted to reality.
ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 33,776
- 17,421
- 136
Uh oh! It looks like we have a really tight race now for the dumbest poster on p&n! Michael1980, it looks like frankramiro is giving you a run for the money!
PottedMeat
Lifer
- Apr 17, 2002
- 12,363
- 475
- 126
Back during the cold war our own militarism was easily justified by the strength of Eastern bloc forces- you know, using actual numbers. Now that the numbers can't justify it our militarists skirt right around them. Other than Russia itself the Eastern bloc mostly switched sides & joined Nato.
The military capabilities of Russia are, in a relative sense, greatly reduced as compared to a modern Nato.
The whole alliance could likely spend less & remain secure.
norseamd
Lifer
- Dec 13, 2013
- 13,990
- 180
- 106
- May 9, 2013
- 2,417
- 75
- 91
The problem is that it is not so much quantity of military resources, but quality.
We want our (NATO/West) jet fighters, ships, tanks etc, to take on the latest Russian/Chinese/etc equivalents.
If we were still using stuff like that from the 1960's (with some notable exceptions, where the stuff was so good, especially US ones, that they may be competitive in some respects even today), and Russia/China/Etc had continued their modernization progress, at the same rate.
If a major skirmish or war broke out. We could find that everything at our disposal (from the 1960's) would just be blown up and lose, because it would be out gunned by modern technology.
It costs an absolute fortune to develop the latest jet fighters (and other military stuff). But we have to carry on this fast paced development, if we want to remain having what are (hopefully), the latest and greatest military gear on the planet.
There are even major new weapon types, which are probably going to be of considerable importance in the near future (if not now), which did not even exist, twenty or thirty years ago.
A good example of this, would be drone technology, which is of increasing importance.
Trump (or whoever wins the elections), could freeze military development/advancement spending. But that could lead to the US being somewhat weakly defended (despite what Trump seems to be saying), in the coming future.
Unlike Russia, China spends huge amounts of money on new weapons and stuff. It is rumored that they spend a lot more, than is publicly released.
One thing to take note from the second world war, was that because Germany had lost most of its military equipment during world war 1, and because they are a relatively rich and highly industrial/innovative and hard working, country.
They were to develop an amazingly powerful array of weapons, which were problematic for the allied forces. E.g. American tanks were inferior, so they could hit the German tanks, but the shells would just bounce off, without doing any real damage. The armor was so good/solid. Yet the German tanks could still blow up the US tanks, which were (sadly) inferior.
The German weapons were so good, other countries, especially the US and Russia, used them as the basis of modern weapons, still coming out today.
E.g. Cruise missiles (were based on V1 and V2's), Landing on the Moon was German rocket technology based (nicely improved by the US though), Jets were invented in Germany (and the UK).
Even the modern type of submarines originally came from German second world war ones. One or more modern bomb types, was originally invented in Germany (WW2), e.g. Cluster bombs.
tl;dr
NATO (and the West), does not want to be taken by surprise, if any significant battle occurs in the future between Russian and/or Chinese modern weapon systems.
I.e. Unfortunately to attempt to stay in the front (of weapon development) is going to be extremely expensive.
Alternatively learn to speak Mandarin, Russian and maybe some Arabic languages for good measure.
Last edited:
Superior tech sounds peachy & all until we realize that any conflict between Nato & the Russian Federation would be a war of attrition. In that, the Russians can't possibly win because their economy can't support nearly as great an effort as Nato.
That's been the story of every major conflict since the American Civil War.
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
As demonstrated in Vietnam with Hanoi's vastly superior economy compared to the US allowing them to win the battle of attrition.
- May 9, 2013
- 2,417
- 75
- 91
Israeli wars, post WW2, give some examples of how superior technology, techniques and big determination, can rapidly win wars.
But I agree, sometimes attrition is what wins the war in the end.
I guess there is no single factor, and wars have many facets.
- May 9, 2013
- 2,417
- 75
- 91
norseamd
Lifer
- Dec 13, 2013
- 13,990
- 180
- 106
Quantity has a quality of all its own.
The problem is that both the Russians and Chinese are developing or already have equipment, platforms, and weapons that are just as advanced, or only slightly less advanced, than what we currently have. And the Chinese are able to produce most anything in huge numbers. The perfect example of this is the J-20. What does it matter if the J-20 is 10% less advanced than the F-22, if the Chinese can produce 750 of them to our 187.
Some more technologies include network centric systems, APS, thermal active camoflauge, electric reactive armor, lasers, ETC guns, railguns, hypersonic missiles, glide bombs, microsatellites, and so much more.
Right now the military seems to be holding off on modernizing some big projects, because switching over to them now is only going to be massively expensive, and they will be outdated in 1 to 2 decades anyways. They are focusing on long term research and development.
Thats actually far more complicated. Yes, the Germans generally overall often had superior technology to their enemies, but they also had a very complicated and inefficient military industry that was just way too small. For example, the Soviet T-34 medium tank was generally superior to every other tank in the war, the perfect combination of firepower, armor, and mobility, with much better armor than most German tanks, and generally much cheaper than the heavy tanks that were actually superior in firepower and armor. It also happened to be very upgradable, even being more upgradable than the venerable Panzer 4, especially since IIRC it had a larger turret ring.
Also, unlike every other nation, the Americans had most infantrymen equipped with semi-automatic weapons. An interesting fact is that before the start of Operation Barbarossa, the Soviets had been upgrading their infantry over to semi-automatics as well, in particular the SVT-40. And at the start of Operation Barbarossa, much of the Soviet infantry had actually already been coverted over to SVT-40s, however in the mass losses in the first year of the war, the Soviets lost many of those SVT-40s, and SVT-40s were not only much more complicated and expensive to produce than Mosin-Nagants, they were far more work to maintain as well. So the Soviets went back to producing Mosin-Nagants for good reason. The Germans never did develop good semi-automatic rifles, but they did develop the Stg-44 line of assault rifles, which started with the Walther and Haenel prototypes of the Mkb-42, and continued on until the Stg-45. But like many of the German wonder weapons, these arrived too late, and in far too few numbers, to have much effect on the war overall.
However, the Germans did have the best machine guns of the war, with the British, Soviets, and Americans relying on the smaller LMGs. They also had some of the best submarines. If only Hitler had given Donitz the numbers of U-Boats that he had wanted, the war might have went much different.
- May 9, 2013
- 2,417
- 75
- 91
It was a difficult concept to describe in a few words. Quantity is also to an extent important (as well as quality).
In some cases, because the US could make some things in amazingly large quantities, and quickly. That fact alone, was of considerable help, to the allies.
E.g. Although the British were losing huge amounts of (tonnage) merchant ships, due to the highly successful u-boats early on in WW2. The British being an isolated island would have got into dire supplies (especially food) trouble.
But fortunately the US were able to keep up, and create vast numbers of new ships, due to their clever, advanced very quick ship building capabilities.
Although the German tanks were much better than the US ones. The US could make many more of theirs, so they had about 10 of the US tanks, per 1 of the Germans. So they were able to defeat the German tanks, by simply lasting until the German tanks ran out of fuel. They were then sitting ducks and much easier to deal with.
I have seen articles and stuff, expressing big concerns, that although the Chinese have at least slightly inferior stuff. They have so much of it, and can produce so many of them, that the sheer quantities, may make them a winning force, all on its own.
Which is similar (or the same) as you said in your post.
Last edited:
- May 9, 2013
- 2,417
- 75
- 91
That is worrying. At the end of the day, the US has a defined amount of money to spend, on the military and its equipment. So hopefully the experts on that can decide the best and most effective ways, of spending it.
Given that a huge amount of the stuff which we use at home and at business's, these days, more often than not, comes from China. It maybe should not come as such a big surprise, that they can produce huge numbers of modern weapon systems. They also have a huge population, which to my surprise, google says is almost 1.4 Billion! Wow. (1,377,641,490). Source:.
That's 4.25 times bigger than the US, wow again.
So they are not exactly short of massive manufacturing industries, which could be shifted over to war production stuff, massive population for using as army people, and probably other stuff.
Even China refusing to supply the US with goods and items, would be problematic, I presume.
Hopefully the combined forces of Nato, are still a major deterrent, against China gaining aspirations.
I also wonder if Russia and China might combine/unite, if a big war broke out ?
On the bright side, the US has got a massive ally/friend over there. North Korea (j/k).
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter