tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post8827451756766461108..comments2024-03-27T03:19:11.216-04:00Comments on Assistant Village Idiot: Just Notes - Not especially organisedAssistant Village Idiothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-28097935042807691312022-04-13T13:48:25.507-04:002022-04-13T13:48:25.507-04:00The risk of escalation is that you provoke your op...The risk of escalation is that you provoke your opponent to do things that are irrational and actually not in their best interest. Whoever is minding the store over a military, be it a State Dept, a dictator, a junta, or a party, <i>should</i> expect that their opponents will act in a manner that is some combination of being a rational and irrational actor. But "should" is a very big word for everyone. Trade cities for a carrier group? Plenty of individual actors would, if they felt national prestige and their personal place in power were at stake. Groups...that gets more tricky, but maybe. Those who view the American response to 9/11 as ultimately irrational and tribal should be particularly aware of the possibility that the Russians, Chinese, Indians, or whatever might do the same. <br /><br />Consider the Middle-Eastern powerful actors who sought to advance themselves and their causes by sticking it in the eye of the Americans in the 90s and 00s. How did work out for them personally and their causes? Al Qaeda made Iran even more powerful in the ME and Osama got himself killed in the process. Iraq had some improvement in places, but mostly became an Iranian state. Blame it on American irrationality if you prefer, but whatever, it didn't work for those guys.<br /><br />A classic liberal argument has been not to make the Russians mad, not to make the Chinese mad, and to blame America if they did. Regardless of the moral truth of who is responsible for a nation's actions, the practical truth is that it might not be a good idea to make your irrational opponent worse. I think it is ultimately a failing strategy to always focus on appeasing insane people, but every time, in the short run there is some sense in it.<br /><br />Nuke the Moon. Nuke Yellowstone. It would show the Chinese we are crazy and might do anything. Isn't that the extension of the logic of "would they trade cities for a carrier group?" It's placing a bet at a poker table. Don't assume we know the answer.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-39539169363574468972022-04-12T23:12:04.488-04:002022-04-12T23:12:04.488-04:00Yeah, but there is the small matter of the Russian...Yeah, but there is the small matter of the Russians occupying some Russian Islands, a bit north of Japan. They can sink ships to a large radius from there. As well its 1000km from Japan to Taiwan with little in between except a few small islands. <br /><br />Anyway modern warfare now and going forward is missiles. Certainly there are lasers that will make a difference soon, but not yet. So missiles will be the way any war, outside of an actual landing, will be conducted. <br /><br />As I said a very simple solution, demonstrating will and the ability to enforce, is to just nuke a carrier group, once things get hot. You gonna trade cities for a carrier group?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-90476198285512307322022-04-12T22:25:28.566-04:002022-04-12T22:25:28.566-04:00Look at a map. Anything China builds in one of th...Look at a map. Anything China builds in one of their ports has to get past Japan/Okinawa-S Korea-Taiwan-Philippines-Malaysia/Indonesia-Vietnam before they can even touch something close to open water in the Pacific or Indian Oceans. They don't even control Taiwan, and once they make a move on it they won't control any of the rest for a long time.Christopher Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00396671757183163171noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-10301489903343682312022-04-12T21:06:56.553-04:002022-04-12T21:06:56.553-04:00"If they could have, they would have already...."If they could have, they would have already. They are not willing to risk it yet."<br /><br />Ah, OK I misunderstood. I thought you were talking about having to disguise a port to do stuff, which makes no sense. <br /><br />I would not be sure they do not have the capacity. As well I am not on anyone's side. I like China more than America, because of its stated goals, but there are lots of reasons to distrust any stated goal.<br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-37577689427028162512022-04-12T20:41:15.643-04:002022-04-12T20:41:15.643-04:00If they could have, they would have already. They...If they could have, they would have already. They are not willing to risk it yet. The Chinese do what they are capable of, no more and no less. If you would read more closely, you would know that i had not claimed that they intend to build secret bases but can't. The general principle of using commercial ports is the point. <br /><br />I can't tell if you understand anything if you misread what I put out and assume I have said things I haven't.<br /><br />Done. You contribute nothing.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-28612478761446479772022-04-12T20:33:18.026-04:002022-04-12T20:33:18.026-04:00"Sell Taiwan a half-dozen ICBMs, warheads inc..."Sell Taiwan a half-dozen ICBMs, warheads included."<br /><br />OK, that would trigger an immediate attack, you understand. They would attack before you delivered them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-14019437228870153352022-04-12T20:30:47.762-04:002022-04-12T20:30:47.762-04:00"Therefore, if the Chinese credibly develop t..."Therefore, if the Chinese credibly develop this capacity - they do not have it now."<br /><br />Well what do you mean by this? I get stuff wrong all the time, but it seemed fairly simple. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-90975346290746399482022-04-12T20:29:52.491-04:002022-04-12T20:29:52.491-04:00Here's what I would do. Sell Taiwan a half-doz...Here's what I would do. Sell Taiwan a half-dozen ICBMs, warheads included.<br /><br />China can rattle all the discount-store sabers it wants, but a nuclear Taiwan stays independent as long as it wants to.Thos.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09562836622083001506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-82204952773642774502022-04-12T20:19:17.724-04:002022-04-12T20:19:17.724-04:00Black box:
Opponent of America = powerful, justi...Black box: <br />Opponent of America = powerful, justified, and making all the right decisions.<br />Other data = irrelevant<br />Opinions other than Pen Gun's = stupid<br />Conclusion = automatic. Every time. With a claim of wisdom and objectivity thrown in.<br /><br />If they could have, they would have. They haven't.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-11170915586128714662022-04-12T18:31:34.835-04:002022-04-12T18:31:34.835-04:00Here's what I would do. Nuke the first carrier...Here's what I would do. Nuke the first carrier group that interfered with my invasion. <br /><br />Think about it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-3440697312740314762022-04-12T18:17:40.676-04:002022-04-12T18:17:40.676-04:00"Therefore, if the Chinese credibly develop t..."Therefore, if the Chinese credibly develop this capacity - they do not have it now."<br /><br />This makes no sense at all. They have ports all along the coast of China. They have places that make weapons, ships subs etc etc. Similar to the US really in this regard. You have a number of port facilities that are dedicated to making weapons, so do they. They are making more weapons than America these days.<br /><br />I'm not sure why you think they have any need to hide anything. They have stated they will take back Taiwan and are working towards making that happen. They would like to do this peacefully but really cannot at this point, because of the USA.<br /><br />So it will be military and perhaps like Ukraine. Interfering with that will be a very dangerous situation, for anyone that does. They are very serious about thisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-46943960359817141022022-04-12T17:57:06.477-04:002022-04-12T17:57:06.477-04:00Deevs...thanks, a useful piece. I'm currently...Deevs...thanks, a useful piece. I'm currently working on a long post about nuclear, and I've also bought a small speculative position in NuScale (via, Spring Valley Acquisition, which is the company they plan to use to go public)<br /><br />It would have been useful for her to compare the cost of electricity in France (70% nuclear) with that in Germany and its obsessive 'renewable'' focus. Probably hard to do because various subsidies would need to be backed out, but worth doing.<br /><br />I think those graphs that are show in this video (and elsewhere) showing Levelized Cost of Energy are very misleading, because they don't consider the time/reliability factor and the costs of long-term storage.David Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15464681514800720063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-73711469110598580482022-04-11T16:10:36.749-04:002022-04-11T16:10:36.749-04:00Our military's basic gamble--that we can trade...Our military's basic gamble--that we can trade money for blood--only works to a point, and even then only if you're much richer and more productive than your adversaries.jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01792036361407527304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-50496016997896889512022-04-11T16:02:57.021-04:002022-04-11T16:02:57.021-04:00I may have misunderstood and they are now making m...I may have misunderstood and they are now making more of them, and better. The arctic ports across the top of Russia are not open year round, after all. First search engine result: https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/2022/01/russias-grand-arctic-plan-might-get-stuck-ice. It kind of looks like exactly what Burja was talking about, doesn't it? <br /><br />It just grows tiring, y'know? Other adults seem to manage interacting with others without that much effort. Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-68403580176203913922022-04-11T13:22:32.729-04:002022-04-11T13:22:32.729-04:00"They are also developing nuclear-powered ice..."They are also developing nuclear-powered icebreakers."<br /><br />Astonishing ignorance. The Arktika was launched in 1975 and there are 11 nuclear powered icebreakers in service today.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-17165521995409928432022-04-11T13:21:12.472-04:002022-04-11T13:21:12.472-04:00David Foster: Sabine Hossenfelder just posted a vi...David Foster: Sabine Hossenfelder just posted a video about nuclear power that's worth a watch. I only bring it up because she talks a little about NuScale in it, which is the first I've heard of it. So, just kind of interesting that it popped up in your comment so soon thereafter. Besides all that, her videos are pretty fun.<br /><br />https://youtu.be/0kahih8RT1kDeevshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03929505847502292412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-60882962858827791102022-04-11T11:32:18.949-04:002022-04-11T11:32:18.949-04:00There is a lot going on with nuclear power these d...There is a lot going on with nuclear power these days, in the form of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) which can be largely factory-built as opposed to mainly built on-site. Two of the leaders in this field are the GE-Hitachi joint venture and a private company (soon to be public) called NuScale. France and even Britain are showing increased interest in nuclear.<br /><br />Key issue in the US will be public opinion. Nuclear fears seem to have died down a bit as the Cold War receded in time; unfortunately, such fears have been stoked to some extent by Putin's nuclear-sabre-rattling.<br /><br />Surveys show that, in the US at least, there is a huge gap between men and women in attitudes toward nuclear power.David Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15464681514800720063noreply@blogger.com