In Syria

[urbanoid]

34 minutes ago, Strannik said:

Did Russia blockade Europe?

Do continue trolling.

As if Russia could blockade Europe, topkek.

Edited April 1, 2023 by urbanoid

[Josh]

1 hour ago, Strannik said:

Re: 5th fleet- and Iran will be just sitting looking at its main export/import being blocked. Right...

 

Iran can’t do anything about an SSN just hanging out outside the straits. So if they want to join China in being blockaded, fine. They’d also have to trash a lot of US air bases in several countries if they went that route, and therefore involve all of the GCC as well. Face it, if the US wants to have a far blockade of China it can, regardless of how successful the PLAN is in the WestPac.

 

2 hours ago, Strannik said:

India would stay neutral most likely.

I wouldn’t assume that, if they smelled blood in the water. Any US/PRC conflict is going to cause massive casualties to the PLAN even if they win; India would be in a commanding position to do whatever it felt like doing.

2 hours ago, Strannik said:

20% is not catastrophic, war effort would consume the slack.

If you say so. That doesn’t seem to be the case for Russia; it still suffered negative economic growth despite ramped up war production. China would not only lose most of it exports, it also likely loses most of its energy imports at the same time as well as a significant source of imported and domestic food. That strikes me as pretty catastrophic. The zero Covid policy would be a drop in a bucket comparatively, and those protests didn’t end in Xi’s favor.

2 hours ago, Strannik said:

But we are not there yet, right now we are looking at the EU - China dance.  Let's see how it unfolds.

The EU likely won’t decouple, especially Germany. But I think that changes drastically if there is a Taiwan invasion, the same way EU policy towards Russia changed overnight.

[Strannik]

38 minutes ago, BansheeOne said:

But, but, we were going to shiver in the dark, and the economy was going to collapse without Russian gas! We were promised! 😢

I never said "shivering in the dark, but do  stand by my statement that German economy will decline.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-31/german-unemployment-rises-more-than-expected-on-sluggish-economy

https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/german-inflation-eases-less-than-expected-march-2023-03-30/

Russia collapse otoh did not happened.

[Strannik]

20 minutes ago, urbanoid said:

As if Russia could blockade Europe, topkek.

That was not the point genius.

[glenn239]

6 hours ago, urbanoid said:

 

I don't really consider either support for Ukraine or potential war in defense of Taiwan 'foreign adventures'. 

I'm not wild about Polish participation in the Ukraine war, but I accept that given Poland sharing a border with Ukraine it has strong national interests there.  That is not the case with Taiwan, so the two look different to me from a Polish POV unless the yardstick is not core national interests.

[urbanoid]

4 minutes ago, Strannik said:

That was not the point genius.

Yeah, I already addressed the point of China blockading Japan and consider it rather unlikely. China wouldn't have to just win in Taiwan to make it possible, they would have to make a short work of USN+coalition with negligible own losses. 

[glenn239]

6 hours ago, Mistral said:

You see you are in agreement with him, you just differ on which people are worth it or not.

The entire point of NATO is precisely defining which countries are worth it or not.

[Josh]

Just now, glenn239 said:

I'm not wild about Polish participation in the Ukraine war, but I accept that given Poland sharing a border with Ukraine it has strong national interests there.  That is not the case with Taiwan, so the two look different to me from a Polish POV unless the yardstick is not core national interests.

The entire industrialized world has vital interests at stake with regards to Taiwan. No one is just shrugging that off as outside their sphere.

[Strannik]

Economy: Ru economy shrank 2.1% in 2022.  That's a reaction to an unprecedented sanction shock without much preparation.  China will be prepared.  Right now they will be squeezing everything they can from the trade with both US/EU and changing from $ to yuan with the rest of the world.

They hadn't created sufficient transport corridors with RU to account for oil/gas blockade, so these will be an indirect indicator of their readiness.

Otoh US financial system can barely tolerate current rates, what is ahead?

 

War:  we talked about it,  so I am not going to repeat. 

The RU/Iran cooperation will be intetesting to watch.  What will follow Su-35.  S-400, more Kilos?  How UA spring/summer offensive will fare. We shall see soon.

Edited April 1, 2023 by Strannik

[glenn239]

17 minutes ago, Strannik said:

I never said "shivering in the dark, but do  stand by my statement that German economy will decline.

There were some media reports about possible dire consequences for Europe, and some EU posters were keenly following the logistics (gas supplies, prices, etc) in realtime, but I don't recall anyone on Tanknet thinking that the EU would do other than get through the winter.

[glenn239]

41 minutes ago, urbanoid said:

As if Russia could blockade Europe, topkek.

Fact is if OPEC were to cut exports to the G7 by 50%, then the G7 is epically fucked, pure and simple, and we may as well learn Chinese to be able to talk to our new bosses.  But sure, journalists that were cut to pieces are important too.

[BansheeOne]

44 minutes ago, urbanoid said:

As if Russia could blockade Europe, topkek.

As if China could blockade Japan, too.

Well, I'm sure the Chinese Navy could blockade them against trade with China, actually. 😋

[urbanoid]

1 minute ago, glenn239 said:

I'm not wild about Polish participation in the Ukraine war, but I accept that given Poland sharing a border with Ukraine it has strong national interests there.  That is not the case with Taiwan, so the two look different to me from a Polish POV unless the yardstick is not core national interests.

What you fail to notice is that it's all interconnected more and more, as the world is a small place - and getting smaller. 

The core national interest is to uphold the Correct World Order™ or at least to do what's possible to not have it replaced with Incorrect World Order™ (which would be a concert of powers, rather detrimental to small and medium states in general). 

I'm not wild about Poland directly participating in Ukraine war either (which won't happen without the US/NATO greenlight anyway and such a thing would be costly, including Poland not going at it alone), I'd rather prop up Ukraine enough to make Russia lose as much as possible. Going in and killing Russians is all well and good, but the more important thing than killing people is killing hope. I don't want them to be able to hope that they can be a world power with influence, having their ass handed to them by a former province, much weaker and very poor would be helpful. Direct Western involvement doesn't sound as good in that context, they understand that they're no match against NATO anyway. I'd rather have them think they're no match against Ukraine.

Chinese victory over Taiwan would embolden other thugs, I'd rather not have that. There's an economic angle also, Taiwan is very important to the world economy. For me though the worst of it would be throwing a small democratic nation to the wolves with full awareness that it won't be the end of it, that there's no actual 'peace of our time' as an alternative.

China and Russia should be kept in their 'Eurasian' cage and bitchslapped whenever they try to show their thuggish snouts out of their pen.

[Strannik]

46 minutes ago, Josh said:

Iran can’t do anything about an SSN just hanging out outside the straits. So if they want to join China in being blockaded, fine. They’d also have to trash a lot of US air bases in several countries if they went that route, and therefore involve all of the GCC as well.

Confused.  According to you  US will blockade oil destined to China (or rather South East Asia, because likely they won't have dominance in 2k mile zone) from everybody in the Gulf?  Then pretty sure nobody will get any oil out of there and what will EU do?

Edited April 1, 2023 by Strannik

[Josh]

56 minutes ago, Strannik said:

Economy: Ru economy shrank 2.1% in 2022.  That's a reaction to an unprecedented sanction shock without much preparation.  China will be prepared.  Right now they will be squeezing everything they can from the trade with both US/EU and changing from $ to yuan with the rest of the world.

China cannot compensate for a loss of global trade, either In exports or imports. Russia is far more insulated that way. They are a net food, gas, and oil importer and have 20% of GDP tied to trade and a considerable amount of domestic food production tied to fishing; there is no way they can “prepare” for a blockade other than accepting double digit negative economic growth. To be fair, the entire world would also suffer negative economic growth in that scenario. But the IS as a net food, gas, and oil producer with a much lower amount of GDP tied up in exports (and also the US would still be able to engage in most international trade) would have a better time of it.

 

56 minutes ago, Strannik said:

They hadn't created sufficient transport corridors with RU to account for oil/gas blockade, so these will be an indirect indicator of their readiness.

well they aren’t ready yet.

56 minutes ago, Strannik said:

Otoh US financial system can barely tolerate current rates, what is ahead?

I’d be far more worried about Chinese banks and their shadow lending practices in any global recession.

[Josh]

1 hour ago, glenn239 said:

There were some media reports about possible dire consequences for Europe, and some EU posters were keenly following the logistics (gas supplies, prices, etc) in realtime, but I don't recall anyone on Tanknet thinking that the EU would do other than get through the winter.

To be fair, I don’t think anyone on tanknet thought the Russian economy was going to implode or that sanctions would change their course of action. It was more an action of not feeding the bear rather than any realistic hope of changing its behavior.

[Josh]

1 hour ago, glenn239 said:

Fact is if OPEC were to cut exports to the G7 by 50%, then the G7 is epically fucked, pure and simple, and we may as well learn Chinese to be able to talk to our new bosses.  But sure, journalists that were cut to pieces are important too.

And OPEC would be equally fucked. And maybe the GCC finds it can’t maintain its planes anymore. What would they or China do about that?

[Josh]

57 minutes ago, Strannik said:

Confused.  According to you  US will blockade oil destined to China (or rather South East Asia, because likely they won't have dominance in 2k mile zone) from everybody in the Gulf?  Then pretty sure nobody will get any oil out of there and what will EU do?

I think in a war that involves China the U.S. will stop the flow of oil. I think that if Iran wants to pick a fight with the US in that context, anyone else relying on Persian Gulf oil is fucked until the US deconstructs the Iranian military. I don’t think Europe gets a vote in that scenario. The upside is that inside a couple weeks there won’t be an Iranian airforce or navy, which should simply things.

[Strannik]

7 minutes ago, Josh said:

I think in a war that involves China the U.S. will stop the flow of oil. I think that if Iran wants to pick a fight with the US in that context, anyone else relying on Persian Gulf oil is fucked until the US deconstructs the Iranian military. I don’t think Europe gets a vote in that scenario. The upside is that inside a couple weeks there won’t be an Iranian airforce or navy, which should simply things.

This is a very optimistic scenario.  At the time when this supposedly will be happening the balance of power will be very different.

Even now it was the US who held the Europeans in IAEA on 84% case resolution.  This + the Syrian exchange dynamic shows the  US reluctance to escalate.  In 5 yrs things will be even more different.

Edited April 1, 2023 by Strannik

[Josh]

13 minutes ago, Strannik said:

This is a very optimistic scenario.  At the time when this supposedly will be happening the balance of power will be very different.

When do you envision this happening and how will the balance be different?

13 minutes ago, Strannik said:

Even now it was the US who held the Europeans in IAEA on 84% case resolution.  This + the Syrian exchange dynamic shows the  US reluctance to escalate.  In 5 yrs things will be even more different.

I’m not sure what you are saying with this. How will things be different?

[Ssnake]

9 hours ago, glenn239 said:

I think if we do what you want, that your country is going to be destroyed to a level not seen since towards the end of WW2, and maybe even worse than that.  I think if we do what I want, that your country and the EU will do just fine.   

I realize that there is such a danger, it's just that I refuse to let my thinking be dominated entirely by that one specific outcome (other futures are still well imaginable). What you don't realize is the overwhelming likelihood that the situation won't stop from developing if you had it your way, so in the end the EU won't do just fine.

We didn't give in to nuclear blackmail from the 1960s to the 1990s, why start with the appeasement now.

[Josh]

4 hours ago, Ssnake said:

I realize that there is such a danger, it's just that I refuse to let my thinking be dominated entirely by that one specific outcome (other futures are still well imaginable). What you don't realize is the overwhelming likelihood that the situation won't stop from developing if you had it your way, so in the end the EU won't do just fine.

We didn't give in to nuclear blackmail from the 1960s to the 1990s, why start with the appeasement now.

I do wonder sometimes how old Glenn is. I get every impression he'd hate Reagan, however much he loves Trump.

[Strannik]

15 hours ago, Josh said:

When do you envision this happening and how will the balance be different?

I’m not sure what you are saying with this. How will things be different?

US repeatedly said it's not going to let Iran become a nuclear power.  However this admin refused to pay a price to return to JCPOA and now Iran is continuing with the nuclear journey.  The recent 84% nuisance was going to trigger IAEA censure but US has restrained Europeans. US is clearly avoiding the confrontation and the reluctance to escalate in Syria after the repeated strikes on US bases supports this.  Considering the discrepancy between stated goal and the actual behaviour one can conclude that US considers the potential escalation not worthy the risks.  This is NOW.

Fast forward 5+/- years forward and US and China went head to head.  Third of USN hulls are gone with a couple of carriers and US decides to stop oil export from the Gulf in order to strangle China.   Iran has more AShBMs, more drones, more AA assets, a couple of dozens of Su-35s and what else.   US basically stops the [almost] only source of income (82%) of the country and I don't think they will take it on the chin.  And so your logic that NOW when US has much freer hands it is reluctant to initiate hostilities, but later while bleeding and is at war it will go for it with Iran and would have a cakewalk sounds like a wishful thinking to me. 

Not to say anything about Europe sitting without oil and gas for the time of hostilities between  US and Iran (likely supported by Russia) because Iran will surely will close the Gulf for Western ships.

The US/EU alliance might not endure this.

Edited April 2, 2023 by Strannik
Typo

[Josh]

44 minutes ago, Strannik said:

US repeatedly said it's not going to let Iran become a nuclear power.  However this admin refused to pay a price to return to JCPOA and now Iran is continuing with the nuclear journey.  The recent 84% nuisance was going to trigger IAEA censure but US has restrained Europeans. US is clearly avoiding the confrontation and the reluctance to escalate in Syria after the repeated strikes on US bases supports this.  Considering the discrepancy between stated goal and the actual behaviour one can conclude that US considers the potential escalation not worthy the risks.  This is NOW.

Fast forward 5+/- years forward and US and China went head to head.  Third of USN hulls are gone with a couple of carriers and US decides to stop oil export from the Gulf in order to strangle China.   Iran has more AShBMs, more drones, more AA assets, a couple of dozens of Su-35s and what else.   US basically stops the [almost] only source of income (82%) of the country and I don't think they will take it on the chin.  And so your logic that NOW when US has much freer hands it is reluctant to initiate hostilities, but later while bleeding and is at war it will go for it with Iran and would have a cakewalk sounds like a wishful thinking to me. 

Not to say anything about Europe sitting without oil and gas for the time of hostilities between  US and Iran (likely supported by Russia) because Iran will surely will close the Gulf for Western ships.

The US/EU alliance might not ensure this.

It will still be cakewalk for the US to destroy Iran and it would take all of one SSN to enforce a blockade even if 5th, 3rd, and 7th fleets disappeared. If they want to engage all of the GCC at same time, good luck to them. Europe doesn’t get a say because there’s nothing they can do to change the policies of Iran, China, US, or any GCC nation. If the lights go out, the lights go out.

Edited April 2, 2023 by Josh

[glenn239]

16 hours ago, Josh said:

To be fair, I don’t think anyone on tanknet thought the Russian economy was going to implode or that sanctions would change their course of action. It was more an action of not feeding the bear rather than any realistic hope of changing its behavior.

That is my recollection as well.  The only thing I thought posters were wildly overstating with Russian sanctions were the claims that weapon production would be curtailed, (when obviously, it was actually going to increase).