Political Posts

[Spekulatius]

I had no idea how bad it is:

https://www.csis.org/analysis/threat-chinas-shipbuilding-empire

 

If the war between the US and China lasts longer the US Navy has no chance, imo.

 

[mcliu]

How does the US make a geostrategic blunder of this magnitude..?

Edited November 27, 2024 by mcliu

[John Hjorth]

22 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

I had no idea how bad it is:

https://www.csis.org/analysis/threat-chinas-shipbuilding-empire

 

If the war between the US and China lasts longer the US Navy has no chance, imo.

 

 

Your posting above, simply put, by trying to kidding us all - unintensionally, I still think here, - here on CoBF,  with this stuff. I just don't buy any of this information at par.

 

Quoting '230 times larger' in yellow? Where the heck is your own soul in posting such stuff here on CoBF?

[mcliu]

https://archive.is/ePRUj

 

Actually according to Reuters and the US Navy it's closer to 630x.

 

 

What has those in Washington even more perturbed, however, is Beijing’s ability to build and repair vessels.

 

One recent unclassified slide released by U.S. naval intelligence estimated that China’s total shipbuilding capacity was now more than 632 times that of the U.S.

 

U.S. officials warn that Beijing can call on dozens of shipyards larger and more effective than the notoriously troubled Huntingdon Ingalls facility in Newport News, Virginia, the largest U.S. military shipyard.

When it comes to warships, Beijing is now outbuilding the U.S. to a remarkable degree.

 

Between 2003 and 2023, China more than doubled its guided missile destroyer fleet to 42. Over the last 10 years, it has launched 23 new destroyers compared to only 11 built by the U.S. Since 2017, China has built eight guided missile cruisers while the U.S. completed none.

 

That naval production capacity is backed up by an even larger civilian shipbuilding sector.

In 1999, Chinese shipyards accounted for only five percent of merchant shipping tonnage globally each year. Now, that proportion stands at over 50 percent, with Chinese yards attracting almost 60 percent of new merchant ship orders last year.

 

That contrasts with the United States, which produces just 15-25 new merchant vessels every year, less than five percent of the global total.

 

[mcliu]

You can explore some raw data for shipbuilding:

 

Vietnam produced 8x, Finland 4x, Italy 7x. The shipbuilding industry is basically dead in the US.

 

https://unctadstat.unctad.org/datacentre/dataviewer/US.ShipBuilding

Edited November 27, 2024 by mcliu

[UK]

2 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

I had no idea how bad it is:

https://www.csis.org/analysis/threat-chinas-shipbuilding-empire

 

If the war between the US and China lasts longer the US Navy has no chance, imo.

 

 

Perhaps as things stand today all this mismatch is still quite fixable...at least by reducing their overcapacity first. Sorry for the black humour:)

[Castanza]

12 hours ago, mcliu said:

How does the US make a geostrategic blunder of this magnitude..?

 

Poor leadership since Reagan 

[nsx5200]

5 minutes ago, Castanza said:

12 hours ago, mcliu said:

How does the US make a geostrategic blunder of this magnitude..?

Poor leadership since Reagan 

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/why-cant-the-us-build-ships

NotebookLM:

"Main Themes:
Historical decline: The U.S. shipbuilding industry has struggled to compete commercially since the Civil War, marked by a long decline punctuated by brief wartime booms.
High input costs: High labor and steel costs in the U.S. make it difficult to compete with countries that leverage lower-cost labor, like China and South Korea.
Cultural factors: A lack of national drive to make the U.S. shipbuilding industry internationally competitive, combined with protectionist policies and union resistance to technological advancements, have hampered progress.
Innovation without commercialization: Despite pioneering key shipbuilding innovations, the U.S. has failed to translate these innovations into successful industries.
National security concerns: The decline of the U.S. shipbuilding industry poses a significant national security risk, particularly in the face of growing Chinese shipbuilding capacity."

 

The article list the miss opportunities for the US ship building industries going as far back as pre-Civil war era.  The Reagan action is just one of the them.

 

Some hopeful news along the lines of country/industry specialization shared amongst the value-aligned countries:

"Now, the US is looking to Asia's[Korean] shipyards to help close that [ship building] gap as the two superpowers[U.S., China] move closer to a potential conflict."

 

Inverting the problem, here are some reasons why China's shipbuilding got so big:

https://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-shipbuilding-power-players-making-warships-at-a-rapid-pace-2024-9

"Its most significant shipyards produce both military and commercial vessels, leveraging industry for defense means"

 

I don't have references to it, but from what I read in the past, the Chinese government's been making intentional decades-long investment in this area, similar to what they're currently doing with EV and AI.

[Castanza]

@nsx5200

 

China has an interesting history of ship building. If you go back tot he 1400's (age of exploration) and look at Henry the Navigator from Portugal; he could barely make it to parts of Africa without major catastrophe. In the same time (unbeknownst to the rest of the world), the Chinese were already sailing half way around the world. The Europeans were sailing in groups of 3 or 4 with ships about half the size of WWII destroyers. Meanwhile the Chinese had fleets of hundreds of ships that were massive in comparison. The Europeans couldn't match them in size until the 1800's. They were also extremely innovative like having a few ships in the fleet filled with nothing but topsoil so that they could grow citrus fruit while at sea and fend of scurvy. 

 

So the question is, why did the Chinese not take this 400 year window and dominate the world? They could have easily dominated the age of exploration but chose not to because they are extremely conservative and more focused on preservation. Changes in leadership kept expansion in check and focus on internals. 

 

So if history is any lesson here, I don't think the Chinese mindset is likely to have changed. The Chinese don't really do anything on a global scale unless it is a near certainty with hedges on their part, because they have been forever internal focused. Preservation over expansion has almost always been their moto. Do you think the ramp up in their fleets change this mindset? 

[Spekulatius]

The Chinese shipyards are dual use, they produce both military as well as commercial vessels. The US shipyards are ancient rust buckets who only produce a ship here and there when they get an order. I think it takes about 10 years to get an aircraft carrier ready for deployment from start to finish. The time during WW2 was less than 12 month. I learned that at a tour on the US Hornet in Alemeda. The US had in WW2 production capacity for 10 aircraft carrier/ year, while the Japanese could do 1-2. Many people think that Japan lost the war in the battle of Midway, but they really lost it before it started because  because the US had 5 x the shipbuilding capacity the Japanese had.

 

Similary,if there is any extended engagement, the US would lose a naval war just by means of attrition. The US would need to do what the Japanese tried to do and end the war quickly.

 

I think the us needs to restructure the industrial complex to become dual use for many things, especially ships and aircraft. The current system to produce small batches here and there can’t really produce a lot of stuff and we know that modern wars are not going to end quickly either and you need lots of stuff to fight and win.

Edited November 27, 2024 by Spekulatius

[Xerxes]

22 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Jesus - rough stuff reading........It really wouldn't surprise me if Ukraine's front line collapses in the coming weeks....it must be incredibly difficult for Ukraine's military leadership to maintain discipline and commitment now in the lower ranks.....I feel for the Ukrainian fighters out there in Eastern Ukraine.....the David vs. Goliath ending is assuredly over now....and so it must be near impossible to summon up the 'why' required to press forward and put your life on the line.

Iran-Iraq War 1980-88 

 

Both sides were gung-ho for first 3-4 years. By year 7 or 8, exhaustion sets in. 
 

I was born in 1980. When I got to be 8 years old, that is when the war ended. 

[mcliu]

4 hours ago, Castanza said:

@nsx5200

So if history is any lesson here, I don't think the Chinese mindset is likely to have changed. The Chinese don't really do anything on a global scale unless it is a near certainty with hedges on their part, because they have been forever internal focused. Preservation over expansion has almost always been their moto. Do you think the ramp up in their fleets change this mindset? 

I think the difference today is the world is much smaller and China has an effective blueprint from the US and UK for projecting power.

[Castanza]

27 minutes ago, mcliu said:

I think the difference today is the world is much smaller and China has an effective blueprint from the US and UK for projecting power.

Hmm

 

I don’t disagree but question whether they are looking for another model. China has 3,000 years of staying power. America has 248 years, and Europe has a checkered history of “success” since 1066. 
 

Or are you referring to, talk softly and carry a big stick? 

[changegonnacome]

46 minutes ago, Xerxes said:

Both sides were gung-ho for first 3-4 years. By year 7 or 8, exhaustion sets in. 

 

Yep mutually hurting stalemates and the concept of 'ripeness' for negotiated settlements has always been a pretty descent framework for how a lot of seemingly intractable conflicts get resolved......ripeness almost being a perfect substitute for the word exhausted!

https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/9897/chapter/7

 

The wrinkle to this..........would indeed be a Ukrainian collapse whereby Russia started making sustained and speedy territorial gains due to the Ukrainian front line collapsing......nothing mutually hurting about making advanced gains in a short space of time....before you head to the negotiating table.

[dwy000]

Russian ruble collapsing. After holding relatively steady for past 2 years it's down about 20% in the past 2 weeks as Central Bank seems to be running out of funds to support it.

 

Will be interesting to see what happens if the general public really starts feeling the effects of the war in Russia. 

[Spekulatius]

China is a lot more outward looking than it used to be. The world is indeed a smaller place and everyone can trade with each other or make war for that matter. They clearly want to become a hegemony, at least in Asia and Africa, if not on the entire world. Keep in mind that communism has it in its DNA to spread and Xi Jinping is a communist.

Edited November 27, 2024 by Spekulatius

[changegonnacome]

30 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

Russian ruble collapsing. After holding relatively steady for past 2 years it's down about 20% in the past 2 weeks as Central Bank seems to be running out of funds to support it.

 

Will be interesting to see what happens if the general public really starts feeling the effects of the war in Russia. 

 

Yep been watching that..... I think everything in the US/EU's power now should be done now to kind of dial up the pain on the Russian side......not sure what sanctions are left or whether the existing ones enforcement can be dialled up....but they should be.....there's a window, perhaps only a few months when Trump gets into office where the whole situation is really Biden's folly still......before too long though the stink starts to get on Trump's suit & its his ego/machismo begins to get wrapped up in the situation.......there's on off-ramp coming up for the two superpowers......I think they'll take it....at the expense of Ukraine.

[crs223]

12 hours ago, Castanza said:

The Chinese don't really do anything on a global scale

 

What is China going to do with 500X shipbuilding capacity?  What will China do with all their nuclear warheads?

 

Edited November 28, 2024 by crs223

[Castanza]

10 hours ago, crs223 said:

 

What is China going to do with 500X shipbuilding capacity?  What will China do with all their nuclear warheads?

 

China has always been more advanced than most of its peers throughout history; yet they have never been the conquer type. I agree the world is “smaller” but I’m not sure I see global domination on their horizon. 
 

If anything I can see them merging with Russia and developing Siberia, taking over Mongolia and the rest of Eurasia Steppe far before they try to take on the West. 

[Spekulatius]

16 hours ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Yep been watching that..... I think everything in the US/EU's power now should be done now to kind of dial up the pain on the Russian side......not sure what sanctions are left or whether the existing ones enforcement can be dialled up....but they should be.....there's a window, perhaps only a few months when Trump gets into office where the whole situation is really Biden's folly still......before too long though the stink starts to get on Trump's suit & its his ego/machismo begins to get wrapped up in the situation.......there's on off-ramp coming up for the two superpowers......I think they'll take it....at the expense of Ukraine.

Target the Russian oil exports via the shadow fleet. Russia war funding comes from selling crude.  Russian Oil will always find a way to leak out so the game is to reduce the amount force them to sell it very very cheap.

There is ample supply world wide which China’s demand going downhill, so I think a reduction in supply is manageable.

 

Most countries who seen a rapidly decline currency are seeing hyperinflation due to the switch to war economy where consumption and investment are replaced by war related production.

 

Most countries where the currency goes to hell end up losing - the Southern states (Greyback), Deutsches Reich (Reichmark started to steep decline after Stalingrad).

 

Another possibility is allowing them strikes on Russian Nsrgy infrastructure like the LNG facility in the Baltics and Refineries in Wolgograd or anything within reach of Storm Shadows. The latter would also reduce their supply of fuel to the front lines. It’s not escalation either because Russia has been hitting Ukraine’s infrastructure since the war started.

Edited November 28, 2024 by Spekulatius

[John Hjorth]

A total mess here in Denmark today. A bit before mid day I had to make a call. Phone refused to react to anything, just playing dead. Found out all connection was gone. This first outage did last some time, but then suddenly things started working again.

 

Severe problems also from the beginning of the day with the only Danish railroad DSB [State owned monopoly], especially in the Northern part of Jutland.

 

Then later a longer lasting outage from about 2:00 PM on the mobile net, and when thing started working again it hammered in with notifications from news media about the outages at main Danish tele carrier TDC.

 

Notifications from news media about all police staff at work to do work in cars ordered on the street. The defense emergency service activated, and sent on the streets.

 

About 7:15 PM all telecom reported reported back to normal.

 

Trains running again, but with delays and cancellations the rest of the day. Expected normal operations tomorrow.

 

No real explanation to get from anywhere about it, and about if these events with telecom and railroad were systemically connected. Just silence ...

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

What?

[zippy1]

8 hours ago, Castanza said:

China has always been more advanced than most of its peers throughout history; yet they have never been the conquer type. I agree the world is “smaller” but I’m not sure I see global domination on their horizon. 
 

If anything I can see them merging with Russia and developing Siberia, taking over Mongolia and the rest of Eurasia Steppe far before they try to take on the West. 

Whether China will take on the west first or not, I do not know.
However, China has been expanding since the Zhou dynasty around 1000BCE.   How could it get so big if China did not conquer its neighbors? The original China (Zhou) is just a small fraction of today's China.  
You can see that on the dynamic map on this page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_expansionism

Edited November 28, 2024 by zippy1

[Spekulatius]

More in n t and shipbuilding. I do wonder if we should get Hyundai to set up a shipyard in the US and build the ships we need, similar to what we do with TSMC:

In any case, working with the Japanese and the Koreans will be key.

[nsx5200]

On 11/27/2024 at 11:02 AM, Castanza said:

So the question is, why did the Chinese not take this 400 year window and dominate the world? They could have easily dominated the age of exploration but chose not to because they are extremely conservative and more focused on preservation. Changes in leadership kept expansion in check and focus on internals. 

Classic Jared Diamond question with his theory in Germs, Guns and Steel:

NotebookLM summary, "Europe's political fragmentation, while seemingly a weakness, ultimately proved to be an advantage in fostering innovation. While one ruler might reject a new idea, another might embrace it, leading to competition and progress."

 

An monolithic autocractic style government can go down the wrong path for a long time, whereas competition amongst fragmented governments will weed out the bad ideas and the good ideas copied, rather quickly, or risk elimination.

 

If I remember correctly, ancient Chinese rulers erroneously ended their sea exploration when they found no other civilization comparable to their, and essentially stopped the flow of new ideas and competition until the post industrial era when Europe landed in China.  "The Last Emperor" captures that time period when old China and the new European-centric world met again, albeit from a limited point of view.

 

Now, the world's gotten much smaller due to the advanced global communications we have, and competition is now on a global scale, essentially for all to see in real-time.  I would claim that all the world leaders now are aware of the competitions, and are no longer so inner-looking.  The true risk for U.S. and Chinese leaders is to make sure they're not selecting their advisors with yes-men, or they risk getting stuck in local minimas.  It makes looking at Trump's cabinet selections a bit more interesting from that point of view.

[changegonnacome]

9 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

Target the Russian oil exports via the shadow fleet. Russia war funding comes from selling crude.  Russian Oil will always find a way to leak out so the game is to reduce the amount force them to sell it very very cheap.

 

I hope they do. The economy really needs to be brought to its knees there to create the right conditions for some sort of settlement next year.........cause every report I'm reading right now from the front lines is bleak....... showing a Red Army on the march and clearly in the ascendency....by contrast Ukrainian reports are of relentless shortages of artillery, men and moral........some 50 ATCAMS, for all the talk, are not changing the overall trajectory of what is fundamentally a ground war.....there is very little military incentive right now for Russia to come to the negotiating table on January 20th....increasing economic pain on Russia is now the most viable pathway through which the West can help Ukraine (& itself) save face with a deal that may be defensible relative to all the hot air spewed in 2022.