What's new
What's new

I keep hearing that this winter will be bad for manufacturing in Europe.

jscpm

Stainless
Joined
May 4, 2010
Location
Cambridge, MA
While I am on the subject of Chinese military "technology" it might be relevant to mention an interesting episode from the First Opium War (1839-42). There was this captain in the British expeditionary force named Cunynghame who made it his business to investigate the Chinese "defenses" and later wrote a book about it. (FYI during the war the Chinese were totally helpless militarily. They killed like one British sailor or something like that in the whole war, and the guy that got killed was unarmed and trying to loot some village with a bunch of his buddies.)

Anyway, at one point Cunynghame investigated an abandoned "fort" allegedly containing "Chinese cannons" and suprisingly found that they had what appeared to be a carronade, which was a relatively advanced kind of cannon. This was suprising because earlier when he had inspected the large "fort" from the initial battle in the war, it had some 200 cannon, all Portuguese imports, yet none of them had quoins, so it was obvious the Chinese had no idea how to operate what they had bought. Yet, here was a carronade, at a small interior outpost no less.

So, he examined this "carronade" and noticed immediately that it had no tangent nut, so obviously could not operate. Closer examination revealed that it was not even made from parts, but had been cast whole from bronze, including the screw! He eventually figured out what happened: earlier in the war, the British forces had lost a brig named HMS Kite which had foundered in the shallow river. The Chinese dredged it up and recovered the heavily corroded carronade with which it was equipped. They then cleaned it up and just made a casting of the whole thing, fittings and all.

In the same vein it should be noted that the primary weapon of the Chinese in the Sino-Japanese war of 1894 was the bow and arrow (not kidding), 50 years after the Opium War. In fact, believe it or not, in the Opium War the Chinese military vessels used rocks with ropes as their anchors. In Europe it was the Romans that developed wrought iron anchors around 150 BC. The Chinese first saw wrought iron anchors on Portuguese vessels in 1510, yet 350 years later they were still using rocks.

This cultural behavior can be contrasted with that of Japan. In contrast to the Chinese, the Japanese started developing Portuguese military technology immediately as soon as they were exposed to it around 1520.
 

Ries

Diamond
Joined
Mar 15, 2004
Location
Edison Washington USA
So they do not want to export anything? That is a surprise because exporting or importing is what makes the world go around. There has been so much investment in China from the US and others since China decided to change. I am glad they changed because the Chinese suffered under the old way.

Calculating the GDP and saying the US has little influence or stake in China really ignores the interest and commitment to invest there over the years. China would never have grown unless market reform was implemented.
This may be true, but the USA never would have grown if the Brits hadnt invested here. In both cases, the past is past.
The chinese keep 51% of most companies with foreign investment.
of course exports are still a consideration to them, but their decisions, just like ours, are mostly made based on internal politics, and in neither country are politics always based on the best economic results.
 

Trueturning

Diamond
Joined
Jul 2, 2019
This may be true, but the USA never would have grown if the Brits hadnt invested here. In both cases, the past is past.
The chinese keep 51% of most companies with foreign investment.
of course exports are still a consideration to them, but their decisions, just like ours, are mostly made based on internal politics, and in neither country are politics always based on the best economic results.

Let’s not forget the Spanish or the French either. Exports and imports will continue even though they may become self sustaining. They are going to have to produce a lot more energy themselves before they can do that. They will not do it because they can get it easy enough. They do have to avoid any war as that would mess it all up. Like in Europe energy is critical. I doubt solar panels are going to change the whole major energy situation. They do not move around like gasoline or diesel which are very portable. Besides we are talking about winter in Europe I am reminding myself.

Edit add; FYI
“Abstract
Since 1978, when China announced its ‘open-door’ policy to pursue the country's long-term national goal, the Four Modernisations, more than 220,000 foreign funded ventures have been approved. By the end of 1994 some US$300 billion of contracted investment had been agreed and US$95 billion of utilized investment, making the country the most important recipient of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the developing world. This paper analyses the phenomenon of FDI in China. It examines the different forms and composition of FDI, reviewing its development since the early days of the ‘open-door’ policy and analysing its importance for Chinese domestic and export industries, as well as Western investor companies. Furthermore, the paper focuses on the world-wide sources of FDI in China and its distribution by both region and industry. Additionally, it reviews the existing research on FDI in China, emphasizing the investment mode of equity joint venture.”
 
Last edited:

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
While I am on the subject of Chinese military "technology" it might be relevant to mention an interesting episode from the First Opium War (1839-42). There was this captain in the British expeditionary force named Cunynghame who made it his business to investigate the Chinese "defenses" and later wrote a book about it. (FYI during the war the Chinese were totally helpless militarily. They killed like one British sailor or something like that in the whole war, and the guy that got killed was unarmed and trying to loot some village with a bunch of his buddies.)

Anyway, at one point Cunynghame investigated an abandoned "fort" allegedly containing "Chinese cannons" and suprisingly found that they had what appeared to be a carronade, which was a relatively advanced kind of cannon. This was suprising because earlier when he had inspected the large "fort" from the initial battle in the war, it had some 200 cannon, all Portuguese imports, yet none of them had quoins, so it was obvious the Chinese had no idea how to operate what they had bought. Yet, here was a carronade, at a small interior outpost no less.

So, he examined this "carronade" and noticed immediately that it had no tangent nut, so obviously could not operate. Closer examination revealed that it was not even made from parts, but had been cast whole from bronze, including the screw! He eventually figured out what happened: earlier in the war, the British forces had lost a brig named HMS Kite which had foundered in the shallow river. The Chinese dredged it up and recovered the heavily corroded carronade with which it was equipped. They then cleaned it up and just made a casting of the whole thing, fittings and all.

In the same vein it should be noted that the primary weapon of the Chinese in the Sino-Japanese war of 1894 was the bow and arrow (not kidding), 50 years after the Opium War. In fact, believe it or not, in the Opium War the Chinese military vessels used rocks with ropes as their anchors. In Europe it was the Romans that developed wrought iron anchors around 150 BC. The Chinese first saw wrought iron anchors on Portuguese vessels in 1510, yet 350 years later they were still using rocks.

This cultural behavior can be contrasted with that of Japan. In contrast to the Chinese, the Japanese started developing Portuguese military technology immediately as soon as they were exposed to it around 1520.
The reasons for advances in military technology can be very interesting. The use of "prop" weapons and equipment was often used-"broomsticks" substituted for actual machine guns to save weight on Doolittle's bombers, inflatable tanks during WW2, use of paradummies, "Ruperts" at Normandy, the list is endless.
While subterfuge is still possible. modern technology makes it quite easy to see what is actually happening on the ground. Drones have really been a game changer....as simple as a cheap drone and a grenade in a cup makes it really tough for boots on the ground.
 

john.k

Diamond
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Location
Brisbane Qld Australia
The mention of the "Opium Wars" is relevant........the Chinese havent forgotten the crimes of the foreigners,and are now flooding the west with addictive drugs as a payback.......Chairman Xi says China is only now erasing the shame of 200 years of foreign intervention ,and will go on to completely reverse the situation.
 

Milling man

Aluminum
Joined
Aug 6, 2021
Location
Moscow, Russia
I wouldn't underestimate the Chinese military, even though they haven't fought major wars in decades. My technologist, who worked in China for several years, says that there, in contrast to the "excellent" Russian army, they really do not like corruption and exaggeration of their capabilities. So they are really engaged in combat training and weapons development. And they have come a long way in this over the past 30 years.
 

jscpm

Stainless
Joined
May 4, 2010
Location
Cambridge, MA
Uh, comparing the Chinese "defences" in the Opium War to brooms on Doolittle's bombers, I think kind of misses the point here. Just to repeat from the above, the Chinese were using BOWS AND ARROWS in the Sino Japanese War of 1894 and that was almost FOUR HUNDRED YEARS after they had first exposed to Portuguese weaponry.

The Chinese have a set of cultural values that has very little regard for technology, and the consequence of that is that their technological development is chronically far behind that of other major civilizations.
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
The Chinese have a set of cultural values that has very little regard for technology, and the consequence of that is that their technological development is chronically far behind that of other major civilizations.

Best I can come up with is it might be a big mistake to underestimate the abilities of China in many different areas---the ability to adapt, exploit, and dominate certain technology would be at the top of the list as demonstrated by how they knocked the living crap out of U.S. manufacturing.
It is entirely probable they could do the same thing militarily.
Only time will tell.
That is about all I have to offer at this point.
 
Last edited:

Demon69

Titanium
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Location
Area 69.
When I have an opinion that sounds 'facty' I frequently stop mid post, look up to see whether my mental image corresponds with reality or not.
lols
$25T debt? You are behind the times, man. We are about to hit 31 and will do so before the end of the year.
Its how our present monetary system is designed to work unfortunately, if there were no debt, there would be no money.

---------------------------------------

Anyone keeping an eye on the rise in excess deaths? Pretty sure that's not gonna be great for manufacturing.



 

Scottl

Diamond
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Location
Eastern Massachusetts, USA
I wouldn't underestimate the Chinese military, even though they haven't fought major wars in decades. My technologist, who worked in China for several years, says that there, in contrast to the "excellent" Russian army, they really do not like corruption and exaggeration of their capabilities. So they are really engaged in combat training and weapons development. And they have come a long way in this over the past 30 years.
I know that even at their relatively primitive state of development during the Korean war they caused a lot of grief for the more technically sophisticated USA so with more modern technology they shouldn't be viewed lightly.
 

michiganbuck

Diamond
Joined
Jun 28, 2012
Location
Mt Clemens, Michigan 48035
Other than the possible taking of Taiwan I think China is not likely not going to start military conflict, and ground wars are not efficient anymore as seen by Russia and Ukraine.
Tawan is not a NATO country. Could have should have is way past now that China is making a claim? The USA telling China what to is sticking our neck way out.
Even if we could take Russia or China it would be a bloody mess trying to prove that.
 

Milling man

Aluminum
Joined
Aug 6, 2021
Location
Moscow, Russia
I know that even at their relatively primitive state of development during the Korean war they caused a lot of grief for the more technically sophisticated USA so with more modern technology they shouldn't be viewed lightly.
Still, it is worth noting that it was really a concern - nothing more. The losses of Chinese and American troops are simply incomparable.
 

michiganbuck

Diamond
Joined
Jun 28, 2012
Location
Mt Clemens, Michigan 48035
China has stated that they will use everything to protect if they are attached. I respect that.
The USA being devoted to protecting Ukraine may start WW3 and may pit Russia, China, and North Korea against the USA for lose, lose situation.
 

standardparts

Diamond
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
China has stated that they will use everything to protect if they are attached. I respect that.
The USA being devoted to protecting Ukraine may start WW3 and may pit Russia, China, and North Korea against the USA for lose, lose situation.
Well Princeton University seems to be thinking about a "what if" over the actions of EU/NATO/Russia. They even did a simulation.....Guess it's all about how smart the people at Princeton are...or how stupid world leaders are. In any event it certainly could be a very cold winter in Europe and tough on manufacturing.

Only thing missing is.......'Game Over Dude'.

 
Last edited:

D Nelson

Stainless
Joined
Jan 7, 2015
Location
Missouri Ida
There is one major difference between real wars and conflicts of recent past: There have not been a war for quite some time where there were two armies directly facing each other!
One could possibly mention the first few days of Desert Storm as the last one, but there the balance of power was so overwhelmingly in favor of the allied forces that I don't think it qualifies.
Maybe some battles in Vietnam does, but you'd probably have to go back the the Korean war for a real example.

IOW not many alive today has hands-on experience with a war where the soldiers are in trenches and duking it out day after day after day.
Maybe hamburger hill might qualify for a face to face battle
Don
 

michiganbuck

Diamond
Joined
Jun 28, 2012
Location
Mt Clemens, Michigan 48035
QT (Princeton University seems to be thinking about a "what if")
But they are missing the boat, the nuclear ones. the first volley will hit the USA.
Russians would not drop one in Ukrain to sit and wait for a reaction.
We will be hit hard and fast, a good chance our guys with fingers on the button will be dead before we know that we are at war.
Russia's first nuck hit will hit us.
I am 4 miles away from one of the targets so a good chance to be a non-survever.
Nukes will hit DC about 20 minutes after a launch from 200 miles offshore.
 
Last edited:

michiganbuck

Diamond
Joined
Jun 28, 2012
Location
Mt Clemens, Michigan 48035

News: Putin 'vanishes to secret palace' as wave of protests spread through Russia.​

Putin is going to his bunker: Harris going to visit South Korea. Now a "roadmap for citizenship for nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants" labeled as a "priority."
Biden keeps telling that Russia is violating NATO rules (when Russia and Ukraine are not in NATO ..
China now owns 192,000 acres of U.S. agricultural land
China, North Korea, and Russia paring up.
Brazil is one of the world’s largest arms exporters to the Third World, whose side will they choose?
We will be very lucky not to have a war.


Forest Gump had it right "stupid is as stupid does."
 
Last edited:

Scottl

Diamond
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Location
Eastern Massachusetts, USA
The more news I hear from Europe about mounting energy issues the more I feel sorry for them as the weather gets colder. I hope our European members will find ways to manage a difficult situation.
 

Scottl

Diamond
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Location
Eastern Massachusetts, USA
QT (Princeton University seems to be thinking about a "what if")
But they are missing the boat, the nuclear ones. the first volley will hit the USA.
Russians would not drop one in Ukrain to sit and wait for a reaction.
We will be hit hard and fast, a good chance our guys with fingers on the button will be dead before we know that we are at war.
Russia's first nuck hit will hit us.
I am 4 miles away from one of the targets so a good chance to be a non-survever.
Nukes will hit DC about 20 minutes after a launch from 200 miles offshore.
Not that I would ever wish it but that is why "Boomers" (missile subs) exist, as a counterstrike that is not easily neutralized. Not all "our guys with fingers on the button will be dead before we know that we are at war".
 

Milling man

Aluminum
Joined
Aug 6, 2021
Location
Moscow, Russia
Colleagues, if we are already talking about the possibility of nuclear war, I would like to clarify some issues.
1. About the simulation from Princeton University. Simulations in which Russian silo-based ICBMs hit US silo launchers, or vice versa, have always seemed very strange to me. They will be empty at the moment of impact! In addition, there is absolutely no guarantee that this strike will disable the silos - they were calculated and tested (yes, missile silos were tested with a nuclear explosion, and more than once) for a nuclear strike. The silos can and will be equipped with various systems to protect against enemy strikes.
Silo-based missiles fly to each other for about 20 minutes, during which time the enemy is guaranteed to launch their own - and not at silos (what's the point of shooting at empty or almost empty mines with a very incomprehensible probability of putting them out of action?), But at other targets - bases submarines, objects of strategic importance in the country, etc. This is the essence of nuclear deterrence.
2. Sea-based missiles, due to their fundamental features (launching from an unknown place in advance), cannot be used to destroy modern, heavily protected silos - they will not have enough accuracy. To disable the silo, you need to get to the right place with very high accuracy. The location of ground silos is calculated and corrected to within meters.
3. Regarding the guy on the button. Command posts in both the Russian Federation and the United States have a GREATer degree of security than missile silos - if only because you do not need to have a "hole in the sky" for a missile. Most likely, only cruise missiles with anti-bunker nuclear bombs, which will arrive not very soon, will be able to destroy them - and in the case of Russian bombers, there is still a huge question whether they will reach anywhere at all :) The procedure for using nuclear weapons has long been approved and worked out to the smallest detail. Yes, some percentage of "guys on the button" will piss or go crazy with fear, this is normal.
 
Last edited:








 
Top