Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

🇨🇳 Satellite images from a Shanghai shipyard may show China testing a new class of nuclear-powered attack submarine... The vessel appears longer than existing Type 093 boats and features a notably smaller sail, a design change that could improve underwater speed, maneuverability, and acoustic performance. X-form stern surfaces, usually...

MarioNawfal's profile picture

Mario Nawfal

3,813,299 subscribers

47,029 просмотров • 26 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологииНовости и политика
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Japan Will Have to Rely on Its revolutionary Lithium Submarines Against China’s New Type 95 Nuclear Submarine China is expected to commission its first Type 95 nuclear-powered attack submarine in the coming weeks, a 7,000-8,000t vessel whose details remain largely estimates. By steadily refining Russian-derived technology, the Chinese are seeking to approach the performance level of the U.S. Virginia class. The Type 95 features modern technologies such as a pump-jet propulsor, advanced sensors, and numerous improvements over the earlier Type 093B. It is believed to achieve sustained speeds of around +25 knots. On the Japanese side stands the revolutionary Taigei class: diesel-electric submarines equipped with lithium-ion batteries that can remain submerged for up to three weeks and recharge in just a few hours. The latest units have incorporated upgrades including quieter snorkel systems, enhanced sensors, and improved battery performance. Can the 3,000-ton Taigei submarines deter the Type 095, which displaces more than twice as much? Both the Sea of Japan and the East/South China Seas feature extensive deep-water areas that strongly favor a nuclear submarine’s ability to maintain high constant speeds. Yet the Taigei would not be easy prey: its high-speed sprints nearly match the Chinese submarine’s cruising speed. Multiple Taigei boats would likely attempt to ambush a Type 95 if it ventured into shallower waters near Japan. Japanese electric submarines remain extremely quiet even at speeds above 10 knots for several days, setting the stage for a true underwater hunt. The Type 95 is expected to introduce new Chinese technologies specifically aimed at detecting very quiet submarines. In the coming years, the Type 95 fleet will gradually grow, but it will eventually face the Taigei’s successor, expected to feature solid-state batteries, higher speeds, submerged endurance approaching 60 days, and recharging times measured in minutes. Anticipating this, China is investing in the Type 041, which reportedly incorporates a compact micro-nuclear reactor and Lithium batteries, offering characteristics similar to the advanced Japanese submarines but with unlimited submerged endurance and greater speed. This is a head-to-head technological race between two major powers.
0:39

Japan Will Have to Rely on Its revolutionary Lithium Submarines Against China’s New Type 95 Nuclear Submarine China is expected to commission its first Type 95 nuclear-powered attack submarine in the coming weeks, a 7,000-8,000t vessel whose details remain largely estimates. By steadily refining Russian-derived technology, the Chinese are seeking to approach the performance level of the U.S. Virginia class. The Type 95 features modern technologies such as a pump-jet propulsor, advanced sensors, and numerous improvements over the earlier Type 093B. It is believed to achieve sustained speeds of around +25 knots. On the Japanese side stands the revolutionary Taigei class: diesel-electric submarines equipped with lithium-ion batteries that can remain submerged for up to three weeks and recharge in just a few hours. The latest units have incorporated upgrades including quieter snorkel systems, enhanced sensors, and improved battery performance. Can the 3,000-ton Taigei submarines deter the Type 095, which displaces more than twice as much? Both the Sea of Japan and the East/South China Seas feature extensive deep-water areas that strongly favor a nuclear submarine’s ability to maintain high constant speeds. Yet the Taigei would not be easy prey: its high-speed sprints nearly match the Chinese submarine’s cruising speed. Multiple Taigei boats would likely attempt to ambush a Type 95 if it ventured into shallower waters near Japan. Japanese electric submarines remain extremely quiet even at speeds above 10 knots for several days, setting the stage for a true underwater hunt. The Type 95 is expected to introduce new Chinese technologies specifically aimed at detecting very quiet submarines. In the coming years, the Type 95 fleet will gradually grow, but it will eventually face the Taigei’s successor, expected to feature solid-state batteries, higher speeds, submerged endurance approaching 60 days, and recharging times measured in minutes. Anticipating this, China is investing in the Type 041, which reportedly incorporates a compact micro-nuclear reactor and Lithium batteries, offering characteristics similar to the advanced Japanese submarines but with unlimited submerged endurance and greater speed. This is a head-to-head technological race between two major powers.

Patricia Marins

21,575 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Why I say Japanese submarines are so dangerous and quieter than many nuclear submarines Conventional diesel-electric submarines are normally quieter than nuclear ones only at very low speeds, typically up to around 2-7 knots. Above that speed they quickly become noisy, while modern nuclear submarines can maintain excellent stealth up to about 20 knots. The British Astute-class, the Virginia Class and probably the French Suffren-class are said to remain among the quietest submarines in the world even at speeds close to 22-25 knots, behind only of the super quieter SeaWolf. So what does this have to do with Japanese submarines? The latest Japanese Subs represent such a leap in technology that they can stay extremely quiet up to 15 knots or more, a figure that gets remarkably close to modern nuclear submarines and is clearly superior to older nuclear classes. On top of that, these Japanese submarines are equipped with AIP and advanced lithium-ion batteries in the Taigei-class, allowing them to remain submerged for 15–20 days at low speed. When solid-state batteries enter service in the next generation, that endurance will practically double and this is scheduled to happen before 2030. Imagine how many daily patrols an adversary would need to track something that can disappear for weeks and need only few hours to recharge on surface. In regional scenarios (Indo-Pacific, East China Sea, Taiwan Strait), the Japanese strategy is perfectly suited, and maintenance costs are far lower than those of nuclear submarines. It is no coincidence that Israel has become a customer and ordered several of these boats. Submarines are a state of art for Japanese.
0:26

Why I say Japanese submarines are so dangerous and quieter than many nuclear submarines Conventional diesel-electric submarines are normally quieter than nuclear ones only at very low speeds, typically up to around 2-7 knots. Above that speed they quickly become noisy, while modern nuclear submarines can maintain excellent stealth up to about 20 knots. The British Astute-class, the Virginia Class and probably the French Suffren-class are said to remain among the quietest submarines in the world even at speeds close to 22-25 knots, behind only of the super quieter SeaWolf. So what does this have to do with Japanese submarines? The latest Japanese Subs represent such a leap in technology that they can stay extremely quiet up to 15 knots or more, a figure that gets remarkably close to modern nuclear submarines and is clearly superior to older nuclear classes. On top of that, these Japanese submarines are equipped with AIP and advanced lithium-ion batteries in the Taigei-class, allowing them to remain submerged for 15–20 days at low speed. When solid-state batteries enter service in the next generation, that endurance will practically double and this is scheduled to happen before 2030. Imagine how many daily patrols an adversary would need to track something that can disappear for weeks and need only few hours to recharge on surface. In regional scenarios (Indo-Pacific, East China Sea, Taiwan Strait), the Japanese strategy is perfectly suited, and maintenance costs are far lower than those of nuclear submarines. It is no coincidence that Israel has become a customer and ordered several of these boats. Submarines are a state of art for Japanese.

Patricia Marins

1,449,011 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

‼️🇺🇸🇨🇳 U.S. General Says China Is Now a True Military Peer and Preparing for Conflict U.S. Marine Corps Deputy Commandant Lt. Gen. Sklenka stated that China is no longer a near peer competitor but has reached parity with the United States across multiple domains. Speaking at the Modern Day Marine Expo 2026, he stressed that the U.S. must reassess how it views China’s growing capabilities. According to him: • China’s shipbuilding capacity is about 230 times larger than that of the United States • Its nuclear arsenal is expanding at a rapid pace • It is developing advanced warfare systems using AI and drone swarms • Future conflicts could begin with cyberattacks and infrastructure disruption before kinetic strikes He noted that if Iran could pressure U.S. forces in the Middle East, a potential conflict with China would be significantly more destructive. He also emphasized that U.S. bases can no longer be assumed secure, stating that forces may have to defend them while conducting operations.
0:21

‼️🇺🇸🇨🇳 U.S. General Says China Is Now a True Military Peer and Preparing for Conflict U.S. Marine Corps Deputy Commandant Lt. Gen. Sklenka stated that China is no longer a near peer competitor but has reached parity with the United States across multiple domains. Speaking at the Modern Day Marine Expo 2026, he stressed that the U.S. must reassess how it views China’s growing capabilities. According to him: • China’s shipbuilding capacity is about 230 times larger than that of the United States • Its nuclear arsenal is expanding at a rapid pace • It is developing advanced warfare systems using AI and drone swarms • Future conflicts could begin with cyberattacks and infrastructure disruption before kinetic strikes He noted that if Iran could pressure U.S. forces in the Middle East, a potential conflict with China would be significantly more destructive. He also emphasized that U.S. bases can no longer be assumed secure, stating that forces may have to defend them while conducting operations.

Defense Intelligence

20,755 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

🚨BREAKING: RUSSIA TO DEPLOY NUCLEAR POWERED MISSLE | Threatens West With ‘Response’ Putin says Russia will deploy a nuclear powered missile ‘soon’. This comes after a successful test of a nuclear-powered and nuclear-capable cruise missile with a potential range of many thousands of miles. Putin also declined to rule out the possibility it could carry out weapons tests involving nuclear explosions for the first time in more than three decades. Today, Putin warned the West of a ‘response’ to the pressure, and his willingness to ‘end the war’: "There is permanently increasing military and political pressure [from the West]. We have to respond. I have said many times that it was not us who started the war in Ukraine. On the contrary, we are trying to end it." “The West has lost the sense of reality. Ukrainian conflict is not about territories. The issue is about global order.” Zelensky warned Europe that if Ukraine loses, Russia will attack other counties as well. Is Russia posturing again, as we’ve seen in the past, or is this not a bluff?
0:57

🚨BREAKING: RUSSIA TO DEPLOY NUCLEAR POWERED MISSLE | Threatens West With ‘Response’ Putin says Russia will deploy a nuclear powered missile ‘soon’. This comes after a successful test of a nuclear-powered and nuclear-capable cruise missile with a potential range of many thousands of miles. Putin also declined to rule out the possibility it could carry out weapons tests involving nuclear explosions for the first time in more than three decades. Today, Putin warned the West of a ‘response’ to the pressure, and his willingness to ‘end the war’: "There is permanently increasing military and political pressure [from the West]. We have to respond. I have said many times that it was not us who started the war in Ukraine. On the contrary, we are trying to end it." “The West has lost the sense of reality. Ukrainian conflict is not about territories. The issue is about global order.” Zelensky warned Europe that if Ukraine loses, Russia will attack other counties as well. Is Russia posturing again, as we’ve seen in the past, or is this not a bluff?

Mario Nawfal

10,996,786 просмотров • 2 лет назад

‼️🇨🇳 China has started construction of its fourth Type 004 aircraft carrier, which will become the first nuclear-powered surface combatant of the PRC. According to reports, the new aircraft carrier with a displacement of 110-120 thousand tons is being built at a shipyard in Dalian and is designed as a direct competitor to the American Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers. Unlike previous Chinese ships, the Type 004 will combine a nuclear power plant (based on Longwei reactors) with electromagnetic catapults and a full-size deck, providing virtually unlimited sailing range. The Type 004 is expected to carry an air group of more than 90 aircraft, including 24-30 J-15T fighters and more than 20 fifth-generation J-35 aircraft, as well as KJ-600 AWACS planes and unmanned aerial vehicles. Thus, all this significantly exceeds the capabilities of previous Chinese aircraft carriers (Liaoning, Shandong, Fujian), which are limited either by the absence of catapults or equipped with conventional power plants. The PLA Navy also plans that the Type 004, accompanied by the latest Type 055A/B destroyers and Type 095 submarines, will be able to project power far beyond China's coastal waters, creating a threat to the strategic superiority of the United States on the world’s oceans. Photo: render of the new aircraft carrier. See the latest updates with us: Visioner
0:53

‼️🇨🇳 China has started construction of its fourth Type 004 aircraft carrier, which will become the first nuclear-powered surface combatant of the PRC. According to reports, the new aircraft carrier with a displacement of 110-120 thousand tons is being built at a shipyard in Dalian and is designed as a direct competitor to the American Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carriers. Unlike previous Chinese ships, the Type 004 will combine a nuclear power plant (based on Longwei reactors) with electromagnetic catapults and a full-size deck, providing virtually unlimited sailing range. The Type 004 is expected to carry an air group of more than 90 aircraft, including 24-30 J-15T fighters and more than 20 fifth-generation J-35 aircraft, as well as KJ-600 AWACS planes and unmanned aerial vehicles. Thus, all this significantly exceeds the capabilities of previous Chinese aircraft carriers (Liaoning, Shandong, Fujian), which are limited either by the absence of catapults or equipped with conventional power plants. The PLA Navy also plans that the Type 004, accompanied by the latest Type 055A/B destroyers and Type 095 submarines, will be able to project power far beyond China's coastal waters, creating a threat to the strategic superiority of the United States on the world’s oceans. Photo: render of the new aircraft carrier. See the latest updates with us: Visioner

Visioner

380,391 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

🚨🇷🇺 U.S. NAVY IN PANIC: RUSSIA’S SUBMARINE BUILT TO LAUNCH POSEIDON NUCLEAR DRONES BEGINS SEA TRIALS Russia’s Project 09851 Khabarovsk special-purpose nuclear submarine appears to have begun its first factory sea trials after being photographed leaving Severodvinsk on August 17. The voyage takes Russia’s first submarine designed from the outset around the Poseidon underwater weapon from shipyard construction into at-sea testing. 🔸 Khabarovsk was laid down at Sevmash on July 27, 2014. It was rolled out of its construction hall on November 1, 2025, and physically lowered into the water later that month before undergoing final outfitting and dockside tests. 🔸 Russia’s Defense Ministry said the submarine was built to deploy modern underwater weapons, including robotic systems. Its detailed specifications remain classified, but it is widely assessed to carry up to six Poseidon vehicles. 🔸 Poseidon is an autonomous, nuclear-powered and nuclear-capable underwater drone designed to travel across intercontinental distances. Instead of flying through the radar and interceptor networks built to detect ballistic missiles, it approaches its target beneath the ocean. 🔸 In October 2025, President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia had launched a Poseidon from a carrier submarine and activated its onboard nuclear reactor for the first time. The vehicle then operated under its own nuclear power for a period of time, demonstrating that the system had progressed beyond launch-only testing. 🔸 The challenge for the United States begins before Poseidon even enters the water. Preventing a launch would require the U.S. Navy to locate and continuously track Khabarovsk across an enormous ocean area without losing contact with the submarine. 🔸 Once released, Poseidon creates a separate detection problem. American forces would have to find and follow a fast, deep-running autonomous vehicle traveling along an unpredictable underwater route that existing missile-defense interceptors cannot cover. 🔸 Russia already operates Belgorod, a converted Oscar-class submarine accepted by the Navy in 2022 and used as the first Poseidon carrier. Khabarovsk is more significant because it is the first submarine designed from the keel up specifically to deploy the weapon. Khabarovsk must still complete factory and state trials before entering service, but its first voyage marks the transition from construction to an active sea-testing program. Once commissioned, it would give Russia a dedicated platform capable of delivering strategic nuclear weapons along ocean routes outside the architecture of U.S. missile defense. Does the U.S. have any realistic way to stop Poseidon once Khabarovsk launches it?
0:22

🚨🇷🇺 U.S. NAVY IN PANIC: RUSSIA’S SUBMARINE BUILT TO LAUNCH POSEIDON NUCLEAR DRONES BEGINS SEA TRIALS Russia’s Project 09851 Khabarovsk special-purpose nuclear submarine appears to have begun its first factory sea trials after being photographed leaving Severodvinsk on August 17. The voyage takes Russia’s first submarine designed from the outset around the Poseidon underwater weapon from shipyard construction into at-sea testing. 🔸 Khabarovsk was laid down at Sevmash on July 27, 2014. It was rolled out of its construction hall on November 1, 2025, and physically lowered into the water later that month before undergoing final outfitting and dockside tests. 🔸 Russia’s Defense Ministry said the submarine was built to deploy modern underwater weapons, including robotic systems. Its detailed specifications remain classified, but it is widely assessed to carry up to six Poseidon vehicles. 🔸 Poseidon is an autonomous, nuclear-powered and nuclear-capable underwater drone designed to travel across intercontinental distances. Instead of flying through the radar and interceptor networks built to detect ballistic missiles, it approaches its target beneath the ocean. 🔸 In October 2025, President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia had launched a Poseidon from a carrier submarine and activated its onboard nuclear reactor for the first time. The vehicle then operated under its own nuclear power for a period of time, demonstrating that the system had progressed beyond launch-only testing. 🔸 The challenge for the United States begins before Poseidon even enters the water. Preventing a launch would require the U.S. Navy to locate and continuously track Khabarovsk across an enormous ocean area without losing contact with the submarine. 🔸 Once released, Poseidon creates a separate detection problem. American forces would have to find and follow a fast, deep-running autonomous vehicle traveling along an unpredictable underwater route that existing missile-defense interceptors cannot cover. 🔸 Russia already operates Belgorod, a converted Oscar-class submarine accepted by the Navy in 2022 and used as the first Poseidon carrier. Khabarovsk is more significant because it is the first submarine designed from the keel up specifically to deploy the weapon. Khabarovsk must still complete factory and state trials before entering service, but its first voyage marks the transition from construction to an active sea-testing program. Once commissioned, it would give Russia a dedicated platform capable of delivering strategic nuclear weapons along ocean routes outside the architecture of U.S. missile defense. Does the U.S. have any realistic way to stop Poseidon once Khabarovsk launches it?

NewRulesGeopolitics

26,789 просмотров • 1 день назад

🚨🇷🇺OCEANIC SHIELD: RUSSIA'S DOOMSDAY TORPEDO IS NOW AT SEA The Russian Navy has launched its most secretive and strategic submarine yet — RFS Khabarovsk — a nuclear-powered special-purpose vessel built for one mission only: to carry and deploy Poseidon (Status-6) nuclear torpedoes. What is Poseidon? 🔸A nuclear-powered, autonomous underwater torpedo 🔸Estimated range: up to 6,200 miles — intercontinental 🔸Capable of carrying a 2-megaton nuclear warhead — 100x more destructive than the Hiroshima bomb 🔸Runs at depths and speeds that make interception extremely difficult Putin himself confirmed its successful test in October 2025, calling it "a huge success" and saying "there is nothing like this” Khabarovsk — Poseidon's carrier: 🔸A nuclear-powered special-purpose submarine, quietly launched by the Russian Navy 🔸Designed to carry up to 6 Poseidon torpedoes in specialized side-mounted launch hangars 🔸Powered by a single OK-650V nuclear reactor 🔸Operates from protected bastion zones near Russian coastlines — safely out of enemy reach — while Poseidon autonomously travels to its target 🔸No countermeasure exists to intercept it Poseidon is Moscow's direct hedge against US missile defense, precision-strike capabilities, and low-yield nuclear systems that Russia views as a threat to strategic stability. Integrated with the Perimeter dead-hand system, Poseidon guarantees retaliation even if Russia's nuclear command and control is destroyed. Russia's plan, according to the US Naval Institute, calls for 30 Poseidons on 4 submarines — 2 for the Northern Fleet, 2 for the Pacific Fleet — with torpedoes in the Atlantic and Pacific capable of autonomously striking US port cities, far beyond the effective reach of any American torpedo. Multipurpose Deterrent — Poseidon is dual-capable, conventional or nuclear, and built to strike carrier battle groups, coastal fortifications, and critical infrastructure. The US has no standoff weapon to intercept Poseidon. The Navy retired Subroc in 1992 — its only long-range anti-submarine missile. Its replacement, Sea Lance, was canceled at the Cold War's end and never replaced.
0:59

🚨🇷🇺OCEANIC SHIELD: RUSSIA'S DOOMSDAY TORPEDO IS NOW AT SEA The Russian Navy has launched its most secretive and strategic submarine yet — RFS Khabarovsk — a nuclear-powered special-purpose vessel built for one mission only: to carry and deploy Poseidon (Status-6) nuclear torpedoes. What is Poseidon? 🔸A nuclear-powered, autonomous underwater torpedo 🔸Estimated range: up to 6,200 miles — intercontinental 🔸Capable of carrying a 2-megaton nuclear warhead — 100x more destructive than the Hiroshima bomb 🔸Runs at depths and speeds that make interception extremely difficult Putin himself confirmed its successful test in October 2025, calling it "a huge success" and saying "there is nothing like this” Khabarovsk — Poseidon's carrier: 🔸A nuclear-powered special-purpose submarine, quietly launched by the Russian Navy 🔸Designed to carry up to 6 Poseidon torpedoes in specialized side-mounted launch hangars 🔸Powered by a single OK-650V nuclear reactor 🔸Operates from protected bastion zones near Russian coastlines — safely out of enemy reach — while Poseidon autonomously travels to its target 🔸No countermeasure exists to intercept it Poseidon is Moscow's direct hedge against US missile defense, precision-strike capabilities, and low-yield nuclear systems that Russia views as a threat to strategic stability. Integrated with the Perimeter dead-hand system, Poseidon guarantees retaliation even if Russia's nuclear command and control is destroyed. Russia's plan, according to the US Naval Institute, calls for 30 Poseidons on 4 submarines — 2 for the Northern Fleet, 2 for the Pacific Fleet — with torpedoes in the Atlantic and Pacific capable of autonomously striking US port cities, far beyond the effective reach of any American torpedo. Multipurpose Deterrent — Poseidon is dual-capable, conventional or nuclear, and built to strike carrier battle groups, coastal fortifications, and critical infrastructure. The US has no standoff weapon to intercept Poseidon. The Navy retired Subroc in 1992 — its only long-range anti-submarine missile. Its replacement, Sea Lance, was canceled at the Cold War's end and never replaced.

NewRulesGeopolitics

56,252 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

There is a lot of confusion right now about the sinking of the Iranian warship IRIS Dena and the role of the United States submarine in this incident. So let’s understand what most likely happened. First, the attack took place in international waters near Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean. Second, the submarine involved was most likely a US nuclear powered attack submarine already operating somewhere in the Indian Ocean region. Many analysts believe it could have been operating from the broader operational area around Diego Garcia, a strategic military base used by the United States and the United Kingdom in the Indian Ocean. Unlike conventional submarines, nuclear submarines can stay underwater for months, because they do not need to surface for fuel. The only real limitation is food and crew endurance. So the submarine could easily remain in the region, quietly tracking naval movements. Now here is the timing part. The Iranian warship IRIS Dena had recently visited Visakhapatnam in India to participate in a multinational naval event hosted by the Indian Navy. After the exercise ended, the ship left Indian waters and began sailing west toward the Arabian Sea. If the submarine was tracking it, the most logical moment to strike would be after the ship left the exercise area and entered open international waters. That is when the torpedo strike reportedly happened near Sri Lanka. Now the next question people are asking is whether this was legal. Under the law of naval warfare, if two countries are in an armed conflict, a military vessel of the opposing side becomes a legitimate military target. Warships can be attacked even in international waters. In this case, the target was not a civilian vessel. It was a military warship of the Iranian navy. So from a naval warfare perspective, this kind of strike is generally considered permissible during active hostilities.
2:59

There is a lot of confusion right now about the sinking of the Iranian warship IRIS Dena and the role of the United States submarine in this incident. So let’s understand what most likely happened. First, the attack took place in international waters near Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean. Second, the submarine involved was most likely a US nuclear powered attack submarine already operating somewhere in the Indian Ocean region. Many analysts believe it could have been operating from the broader operational area around Diego Garcia, a strategic military base used by the United States and the United Kingdom in the Indian Ocean. Unlike conventional submarines, nuclear submarines can stay underwater for months, because they do not need to surface for fuel. The only real limitation is food and crew endurance. So the submarine could easily remain in the region, quietly tracking naval movements. Now here is the timing part. The Iranian warship IRIS Dena had recently visited Visakhapatnam in India to participate in a multinational naval event hosted by the Indian Navy. After the exercise ended, the ship left Indian waters and began sailing west toward the Arabian Sea. If the submarine was tracking it, the most logical moment to strike would be after the ship left the exercise area and entered open international waters. That is when the torpedo strike reportedly happened near Sri Lanka. Now the next question people are asking is whether this was legal. Under the law of naval warfare, if two countries are in an armed conflict, a military vessel of the opposing side becomes a legitimate military target. Warships can be attacked even in international waters. In this case, the target was not a civilian vessel. It was a military warship of the Iranian navy. So from a naval warfare perspective, this kind of strike is generally considered permissible during active hostilities.

Praffulgarg

25,213 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

CHINA’S NOT GOING BACK TO OUR MOON - THEY’RE PICKING A NEW ONE China is visiting Kamo’oalewa, a “quasi-moon” that orbits the Sun with a trajectory that mirrors the one Earth has. It’s about 40 to 100 meters wide and hangs out 12 times farther from us than the Moon. Scientists think it might be a chunk of our actual Moon, blasted off long ago by some ancient impact. The mission plans to bring back a sample by 2030, which would make China the first nation to return material from a near-Earth asteroid. It’s not yet clear whether Beijing believes there’s a rare mineral jackpot on this space rock, or if they’re just picking a different Moon now that the original feels kinda... western. Source: Cleo Abram
0:42

CHINA’S NOT GOING BACK TO OUR MOON - THEY’RE PICKING A NEW ONE China is visiting Kamo’oalewa, a “quasi-moon” that orbits the Sun with a trajectory that mirrors the one Earth has. It’s about 40 to 100 meters wide and hangs out 12 times farther from us than the Moon. Scientists think it might be a chunk of our actual Moon, blasted off long ago by some ancient impact. The mission plans to bring back a sample by 2030, which would make China the first nation to return material from a near-Earth asteroid. It’s not yet clear whether Beijing believes there’s a rare mineral jackpot on this space rock, or if they’re just picking a different Moon now that the original feels kinda... western. Source: Cleo Abram

Mario Nawfal

76,295 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Japan has just rendered an entire generation of conventional submarines obsolete, and the world hasn’t fully realized it yet. With the Taigei class and its lithium-ion batteries, Tokyo already set a new benchmark: up to three weeks submerged without ever raising a snorkel. That, however, was merely the opening act. Today, Toyota and Panasonic are leading the global race in solid-state batteries, with prototypes arriving in 2027–2028, mass production after 2030, and Japan’s next submarine class will be the first to use them, either in pure battery form or as a hybrid with a small reactor for onboard recharging. This hybrid would be similar to what the Chineses are developing. The leap is staggering. A 4,000 ton conventional submarine will patrol for 40 to 60 days without surfacing, sprint well above 20 knots for hours on end, and do it all more quietly than many nuclear subs, thanks to being significantly lighter and running solely on battery power. Solid-state cells weigh roughly one-third as much, generate 40 % less heat, and eliminate half the cooling systems. The result is a faster, stealthier hull that can travel thousands of kilometers without ever breaking the surface. Those hundreds of saved tons translate directly into more powerful electric motors, extra torpedoes and missiles, cutting-edge sensors, or greater crew comfort. The same hull now carries twice the energy or twice the weapons. It means that by 2035–2040, Japan will field conventional submarines with the endurance and sprint performance of today’s 8,000-ton nuclear boats, at one-third the cost and without the political baggage of uranium.
0:25

Japan has just rendered an entire generation of conventional submarines obsolete, and the world hasn’t fully realized it yet. With the Taigei class and its lithium-ion batteries, Tokyo already set a new benchmark: up to three weeks submerged without ever raising a snorkel. That, however, was merely the opening act. Today, Toyota and Panasonic are leading the global race in solid-state batteries, with prototypes arriving in 2027–2028, mass production after 2030, and Japan’s next submarine class will be the first to use them, either in pure battery form or as a hybrid with a small reactor for onboard recharging. This hybrid would be similar to what the Chineses are developing. The leap is staggering. A 4,000 ton conventional submarine will patrol for 40 to 60 days without surfacing, sprint well above 20 knots for hours on end, and do it all more quietly than many nuclear subs, thanks to being significantly lighter and running solely on battery power. Solid-state cells weigh roughly one-third as much, generate 40 % less heat, and eliminate half the cooling systems. The result is a faster, stealthier hull that can travel thousands of kilometers without ever breaking the surface. Those hundreds of saved tons translate directly into more powerful electric motors, extra torpedoes and missiles, cutting-edge sensors, or greater crew comfort. The same hull now carries twice the energy or twice the weapons. It means that by 2035–2040, Japan will field conventional submarines with the endurance and sprint performance of today’s 8,000-ton nuclear boats, at one-third the cost and without the political baggage of uranium.

Patricia Marins

2,732,374 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

AUKUS: The billlion-Dollar Trap? Next week I’ll publish a deep-dive article showing how the Australians (and others) got themselves into one of the biggest defense money pits in modern history with the AUKUS SSN program: total cost estimated between US$177 billion and US$244 billion over 30–35 years, with the first nuclear-powered submarines arriving only in the early 2030s and the full fleet completed sometime in the 2050s–2060s, by which time the core technology can possibly already be obsolete. And Australia isn’t alone. India is pouring tens of billions into its own nuclear attack submarine program and risks ending up in exactly the same boat. Just a few days ago, when I wrote about the Japanese Taigei-class and lithium-ion batteries, I pointed out the real trend: within the next 5–8 years, solid-state batteries (already scaling up in China, South Korea and Japan) will allow conventional submarines of 4,500–5,500 tons to: - stay submerged for 40–60 days - recharge in just a few hours or use. - cost under US$ 800 million each - become almost impossible to detect because they never need to snorkel But that’s only the part about the conventional subs. China has already launched the first prototype of a hybrid submarine (Type 041 Zhou-class) that uses a micro nuclear reactor (10–15 MW thermal), weighing roughly 20-25% of a conventional SSN reactor, fully modular, easily replaceable, and with dramatically lower maintenance costs, whose sole job is to continuously charge a large battery bank. Result: solid State batteries, unlimited submerged endurance, 20–22 knots continuous, 30+ knot sprint, and unit cost in series production estimated at US$1–1.5 billion. At least four other countries (Russia, South Korea, Japan, and Brazil) are now openly working on very similar small nuclear-conventional designs, but only the Chinese is a real hybrid model. This is no longer a one-off prototype; it’s the announced future of submarines powered by solid batteries recharged by micro reactors. The harsh reality: by the time the last Australian AUKUS submarine is delivered (around 2060), the most advanced navies will be mass-operating cheap hybrid subs, AI-guided autonomous torpedoes, underwater drone swarms, and large nuclear-powered UUVs. Much of today’s naval doctrine, centered on a handful of ultra-expensive crewed SSNs, can look as outdated as battleships did in 1945, in just few decades. Any multi-hundred-billion-dollar defense investment today must be judged against the 2035–2045 timeline, not the 1960s playbook. Otherwise taxpayers foot the bill and the navy ends up with very expensive floating museums.
0:25

AUKUS: The billlion-Dollar Trap? Next week I’ll publish a deep-dive article showing how the Australians (and others) got themselves into one of the biggest defense money pits in modern history with the AUKUS SSN program: total cost estimated between US$177 billion and US$244 billion over 30–35 years, with the first nuclear-powered submarines arriving only in the early 2030s and the full fleet completed sometime in the 2050s–2060s, by which time the core technology can possibly already be obsolete. And Australia isn’t alone. India is pouring tens of billions into its own nuclear attack submarine program and risks ending up in exactly the same boat. Just a few days ago, when I wrote about the Japanese Taigei-class and lithium-ion batteries, I pointed out the real trend: within the next 5–8 years, solid-state batteries (already scaling up in China, South Korea and Japan) will allow conventional submarines of 4,500–5,500 tons to: - stay submerged for 40–60 days - recharge in just a few hours or use. - cost under US$ 800 million each - become almost impossible to detect because they never need to snorkel But that’s only the part about the conventional subs. China has already launched the first prototype of a hybrid submarine (Type 041 Zhou-class) that uses a micro nuclear reactor (10–15 MW thermal), weighing roughly 20-25% of a conventional SSN reactor, fully modular, easily replaceable, and with dramatically lower maintenance costs, whose sole job is to continuously charge a large battery bank. Result: solid State batteries, unlimited submerged endurance, 20–22 knots continuous, 30+ knot sprint, and unit cost in series production estimated at US$1–1.5 billion. At least four other countries (Russia, South Korea, Japan, and Brazil) are now openly working on very similar small nuclear-conventional designs, but only the Chinese is a real hybrid model. This is no longer a one-off prototype; it’s the announced future of submarines powered by solid batteries recharged by micro reactors. The harsh reality: by the time the last Australian AUKUS submarine is delivered (around 2060), the most advanced navies will be mass-operating cheap hybrid subs, AI-guided autonomous torpedoes, underwater drone swarms, and large nuclear-powered UUVs. Much of today’s naval doctrine, centered on a handful of ultra-expensive crewed SSNs, can look as outdated as battleships did in 1945, in just few decades. Any multi-hundred-billion-dollar defense investment today must be judged against the 2035–2045 timeline, not the 1960s playbook. Otherwise taxpayers foot the bill and the navy ends up with very expensive floating museums.

Patricia Marins

59,196 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

🚨NUCLEAR EXTINCTION: PUTIN HAS THREATENED ANNIHILATION IF A NUCLEAR STRIKE IS DETECTED Putin's recent statements on nuclear capabilities should be alarming to EVERYONE. He threatened ‘enemies’ with total nuclear annihilation, leaving 'no chance of survival' Putin emphasized that once Nuclear missile launches are detected, a massive retaliatory strike of HUNDREDS of Russian Nuclear missiles will be unleashed from various directions, ensuring that ‘no single enemy survives.’ In other words, any Nuclear strike from any NATO member could mean a simultaneous and total nuclear strike against all NATO nuclear powers, including the U.S. It's important to note that NATO has never threatened a first strike on Moscow. Recent reports suggested suspicions of a new test in the Arctic involving the Burevestnik, a super powerful missile with an onboard nuclear reactor. Putin also bragged about the successful testing of the 'Sarmat' or 'Satan-2,' an unstoppable ICBM that travels at 15,880 mph and is the size of a 14-storey tower block. He vowed to move towards mass production and combat duty deployment soon. When asked about resuming nuclear weapons testing, Putin remained non-committal, suggesting Russia could potentially revoke ratification of the international nuclear test ban treaty. MY THOUGHTS: The Ukraine war is complex. Russia is at fault, and denying this is ridiculous. This does NOT mean NATO is also not at fault, and it does not mean one cannot criticize the West for not doing enough to END the war. Voters, the media, and lawmakers, need to take steps in DE-ESCALATING this war rather than criticizing those who do so. I don’t want to sound alarming, but if this war gets out of control, the world is at risk of more destruction than both World Wars combined. Although slim, this is the closest we've been to such a position since the Cold War. Russia is known to bluff, and people like to compare this to the ‘Boy That Cried Wolf’. What those people forget is that eventually, the boy cried wolf and the wolf was actually there, killing the boy. This is a risk the world CANNOT AFFORD.
0:37

🚨NUCLEAR EXTINCTION: PUTIN HAS THREATENED ANNIHILATION IF A NUCLEAR STRIKE IS DETECTED Putin's recent statements on nuclear capabilities should be alarming to EVERYONE. He threatened ‘enemies’ with total nuclear annihilation, leaving 'no chance of survival' Putin emphasized that once Nuclear missile launches are detected, a massive retaliatory strike of HUNDREDS of Russian Nuclear missiles will be unleashed from various directions, ensuring that ‘no single enemy survives.’ In other words, any Nuclear strike from any NATO member could mean a simultaneous and total nuclear strike against all NATO nuclear powers, including the U.S. It's important to note that NATO has never threatened a first strike on Moscow. Recent reports suggested suspicions of a new test in the Arctic involving the Burevestnik, a super powerful missile with an onboard nuclear reactor. Putin also bragged about the successful testing of the 'Sarmat' or 'Satan-2,' an unstoppable ICBM that travels at 15,880 mph and is the size of a 14-storey tower block. He vowed to move towards mass production and combat duty deployment soon. When asked about resuming nuclear weapons testing, Putin remained non-committal, suggesting Russia could potentially revoke ratification of the international nuclear test ban treaty. MY THOUGHTS: The Ukraine war is complex. Russia is at fault, and denying this is ridiculous. This does NOT mean NATO is also not at fault, and it does not mean one cannot criticize the West for not doing enough to END the war. Voters, the media, and lawmakers, need to take steps in DE-ESCALATING this war rather than criticizing those who do so. I don’t want to sound alarming, but if this war gets out of control, the world is at risk of more destruction than both World Wars combined. Although slim, this is the closest we've been to such a position since the Cold War. Russia is known to bluff, and people like to compare this to the ‘Boy That Cried Wolf’. What those people forget is that eventually, the boy cried wolf and the wolf was actually there, killing the boy. This is a risk the world CANNOT AFFORD.

Mario Nawfal

6,904,590 просмотров • 2 лет назад

🚨🇺🇸🇨🇳 China's Decisive Home-Field Advantage Over the U.S. The Iran War demonstrated American military capability — but also revealed a critical vulnerability. Modern wars, even against weaker adversaries, burn through missiles at an extraordinary rate. But Iran and China are not remotely comparable. China has spent decades preparing specifically for a war against American naval power. Beijing would not rely on speedboats or mines. It would attempt a coordinated campaign designed to keep U.S. carrier strike groups far from the fight — and make intervention around Taiwan or the South China Sea costly from the opening hours of the war. 🔸 China's DF-21D "carrier killer" ballistic missile has an estimated range of 1,500 kilometers. 🔸 The longer-range DF-26 can reach much farther and threatens Guam — a critical U.S. logistics and air hub. 🔸 China would also fight with submarines, long-range bombers, drones, satellites, electronic warfare, and cyberattacks — feats Iran could not sustain. 🔸 Chinese aircraft, missile forces, and naval units would operate near home territory with shorter supply lines and land-based support. 🔸 U.S. forces would need to project power across long distances while protecting bases in Guam, Okinawa, and Japan — all of which could face missile attack in the opening phase of a war. 🔸 Logistics often decide wars. Between fuel, spare parts, runway repairs, and missile reloads, the winning side needs to perfect its ability to support its fighters and hardware at all times. The core issue is endurance. U.S. forces would be heavily dependent on scattered bases throughout the region, requiring fighter jets and bombers to travel long distances. China is built to fight close to home, while the U.S. must sustain power Meanwhile. Missile threats and logistics constraints would slow American response and strain its ability to maintain tempo. Without major adaptation, geography and preparation give Beijing a decisive edge in a prolonged conflict.
0:41

🚨🇺🇸🇨🇳 China's Decisive Home-Field Advantage Over the U.S. The Iran War demonstrated American military capability — but also revealed a critical vulnerability. Modern wars, even against weaker adversaries, burn through missiles at an extraordinary rate. But Iran and China are not remotely comparable. China has spent decades preparing specifically for a war against American naval power. Beijing would not rely on speedboats or mines. It would attempt a coordinated campaign designed to keep U.S. carrier strike groups far from the fight — and make intervention around Taiwan or the South China Sea costly from the opening hours of the war. 🔸 China's DF-21D "carrier killer" ballistic missile has an estimated range of 1,500 kilometers. 🔸 The longer-range DF-26 can reach much farther and threatens Guam — a critical U.S. logistics and air hub. 🔸 China would also fight with submarines, long-range bombers, drones, satellites, electronic warfare, and cyberattacks — feats Iran could not sustain. 🔸 Chinese aircraft, missile forces, and naval units would operate near home territory with shorter supply lines and land-based support. 🔸 U.S. forces would need to project power across long distances while protecting bases in Guam, Okinawa, and Japan — all of which could face missile attack in the opening phase of a war. 🔸 Logistics often decide wars. Between fuel, spare parts, runway repairs, and missile reloads, the winning side needs to perfect its ability to support its fighters and hardware at all times. The core issue is endurance. U.S. forces would be heavily dependent on scattered bases throughout the region, requiring fighter jets and bombers to travel long distances. China is built to fight close to home, while the U.S. must sustain power Meanwhile. Missile threats and logistics constraints would slow American response and strain its ability to maintain tempo. Without major adaptation, geography and preparation give Beijing a decisive edge in a prolonged conflict.

NewRulesGeopolitics

21,899 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

🚨🇨🇳 U.S. NAVY IN PANIC: CHINA ARMS ITS MAIN DESTROYER CLASS WITH YJ-20 HYPERSONIC MISSILES New PLA footage has shown a Type 052D destroyer launching the YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship ballistic missile for the first time publicly. Previously demonstrated aboard the larger Type 055, the weapon has now reached the class that forms the backbone of China’s surface fleet. 🔸 The YJ-20 is a boost-glide weapon capable of speeds above Mach 5, with its range estimated at up to 1,500 km. Its manoeuvring bi-conic glide body can strike ships at a steep, near-vertical angle, making interception far more difficult. 🔸 The missile was cold-launched from one of the Type 052D’s 64 universal vertical-launch cells, ejecting above the ship before its motor ignited. 🔸 More than 35 Type 052Ds are already in service, with additional ships under construction. Unlike the smaller Type 055 fleet, these destroyers are produced in large numbers and routinely operate across the South China Sea and Western Pacific. 🔸 The YJ-20 does not need to replace the YJ-18. A mixed load allows Chinese destroyers to combine long-range hypersonic attacks with sea-skimming cruise missiles, forcing carrier defenses to confront different speeds, trajectories and approach angles. 🔸 This is what makes the integration more important than a single launch. Hypersonic anti-ship firepower can now spread beyond China’s largest destroyers to a far more numerous class, creating more launch platforms and attack directions. 🔸 The Pentagon’s leaked Overmatch brief found that American warships such as the Gerald R. Ford were often destroyed in Taiwan war games. Giving China’s primary destroyer class a hypersonic carrier-killer makes those scenarios even harder for the U.S. Navy. The threat is no longer one rare missile aboard a handful of large warships. It is China’s mass-produced destroyer fleet gaining the ability to attack U.S. carrier groups from extreme range. What threatens U.S. carriers more: the YJ-20’s speed or the number of ships that can launch it?
0:22

🚨🇨🇳 U.S. NAVY IN PANIC: CHINA ARMS ITS MAIN DESTROYER CLASS WITH YJ-20 HYPERSONIC MISSILES New PLA footage has shown a Type 052D destroyer launching the YJ-20 hypersonic anti-ship ballistic missile for the first time publicly. Previously demonstrated aboard the larger Type 055, the weapon has now reached the class that forms the backbone of China’s surface fleet. 🔸 The YJ-20 is a boost-glide weapon capable of speeds above Mach 5, with its range estimated at up to 1,500 km. Its manoeuvring bi-conic glide body can strike ships at a steep, near-vertical angle, making interception far more difficult. 🔸 The missile was cold-launched from one of the Type 052D’s 64 universal vertical-launch cells, ejecting above the ship before its motor ignited. 🔸 More than 35 Type 052Ds are already in service, with additional ships under construction. Unlike the smaller Type 055 fleet, these destroyers are produced in large numbers and routinely operate across the South China Sea and Western Pacific. 🔸 The YJ-20 does not need to replace the YJ-18. A mixed load allows Chinese destroyers to combine long-range hypersonic attacks with sea-skimming cruise missiles, forcing carrier defenses to confront different speeds, trajectories and approach angles. 🔸 This is what makes the integration more important than a single launch. Hypersonic anti-ship firepower can now spread beyond China’s largest destroyers to a far more numerous class, creating more launch platforms and attack directions. 🔸 The Pentagon’s leaked Overmatch brief found that American warships such as the Gerald R. Ford were often destroyed in Taiwan war games. Giving China’s primary destroyer class a hypersonic carrier-killer makes those scenarios even harder for the U.S. Navy. The threat is no longer one rare missile aboard a handful of large warships. It is China’s mass-produced destroyer fleet gaining the ability to attack U.S. carrier groups from extreme range. What threatens U.S. carriers more: the YJ-20’s speed or the number of ships that can launch it?

NewRulesGeopolitics

15,627 просмотров • 20 дней назад

🇨🇳 Everyone braced for the Iran war to crush China. It walked away the biggest winner, and some argue that was the plan all along... Brandon Weichert flips the usual script. Beijing, he argues, treated this war as a stress test, a proof of concept, to see whether it could ride out a real crisis with Washington. It could. While the U.S. now sits exposed and waiting for the bottom to fall out, China quietly pulled itself off the global oil market for two months and leaned on the reserves it spent years stockpiling. The country that was supposed to be most vulnerable turned out to be the most insulated. And the war, in his telling, supercharged the very thing that makes China hard to corner: scale. Solar, batteries, EVs, hydro, nuclear, even a fusion program he says outpaces the West. The crisis became a sales pitch for Chinese energy and a billboard for the narrative Beijing has pushed for years, that America destabilizes and China endures. What gives his read teeth is the restraint underneath it. He doesn't see China lunging for the wheel. A four-thousand-year-old instinct, he says, makes Beijing crave calm on its borders, so it would rather let the world drift into its orbit than seize it. "Do nothing and still win," as the meme goes. The one place that calm could shatter, in his view, isn't Taiwan. It's Japan. Brandon Weichert
35:08

🇨🇳 Everyone braced for the Iran war to crush China. It walked away the biggest winner, and some argue that was the plan all along... Brandon Weichert flips the usual script. Beijing, he argues, treated this war as a stress test, a proof of concept, to see whether it could ride out a real crisis with Washington. It could. While the U.S. now sits exposed and waiting for the bottom to fall out, China quietly pulled itself off the global oil market for two months and leaned on the reserves it spent years stockpiling. The country that was supposed to be most vulnerable turned out to be the most insulated. And the war, in his telling, supercharged the very thing that makes China hard to corner: scale. Solar, batteries, EVs, hydro, nuclear, even a fusion program he says outpaces the West. The crisis became a sales pitch for Chinese energy and a billboard for the narrative Beijing has pushed for years, that America destabilizes and China endures. What gives his read teeth is the restraint underneath it. He doesn't see China lunging for the wheel. A four-thousand-year-old instinct, he says, makes Beijing crave calm on its borders, so it would rather let the world drift into its orbit than seize it. "Do nothing and still win," as the meme goes. The one place that calm could shatter, in his view, isn't Taiwan. It's Japan. Brandon Weichert

Mario Nawfal

206,100 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Axios reports that after a phone call, President Trump said the U.S. is prepared to act militarily if talks with Iran fail. “Either we make a deal, or we’ll have to do something very tough, like last time.” Trump said he is considering sending a second aircraft carrier to the Middle East, alongside the USS Lincoln, plus additional attack ships and fighter jets. “We have an armada there, and perhaps another one on the way.” He said Iran is showing far more flexibility than before the 12 day war. “These are completely different contacts than last time. The Iranians didn’t believe I would attack them; they took too big a gamble.” Trump said Netanyahu is not pressured by U.S. talks with Iran. “He also wants a deal. He wants a good deal.” Trump added that a deal would bar Iran from nuclear weapons and missiles, calling the nuclear issue a “no brainer,” and said another round of U.S. Iran talks could happen as early as next week.
1:50

Axios reports that after a phone call, President Trump said the U.S. is prepared to act militarily if talks with Iran fail. “Either we make a deal, or we’ll have to do something very tough, like last time.” Trump said he is considering sending a second aircraft carrier to the Middle East, alongside the USS Lincoln, plus additional attack ships and fighter jets. “We have an armada there, and perhaps another one on the way.” He said Iran is showing far more flexibility than before the 12 day war. “These are completely different contacts than last time. The Iranians didn’t believe I would attack them; they took too big a gamble.” Trump said Netanyahu is not pressured by U.S. talks with Iran. “He also wants a deal. He wants a good deal.” Trump added that a deal would bar Iran from nuclear weapons and missiles, calling the nuclear issue a “no brainer,” and said another round of U.S. Iran talks could happen as early as next week.

Open Source Intel

49,918 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

This is incredible: Dominic Cummings (the former Chief Adviser to the British Prime Minister) calling the current Western policy on Taiwan "completely insane" and "'f*cking stupid". Exceedingly rare to see former senior officials abandon political correctness to this extent, and tell the raw, unvarnished truth. Actually pretty refreshing! Here is what he says: He says that a war over Taiwan with China, is "obviously not" worth it and that "it's completely crazy" for the West to be ditching the One-China policy that aims at peacefully reuniting Taiwan and the mainland: "[A war over Taiwan with China] is a completely insane idea. It's an island that you can see from the Chinese coast. It's full of Chinese people. The people in in the army are cousins of the people in the opposite army. For decades we've had a One-China policy accepted by Democrats and Republicans across the western world [where Taiwan is] going to be unified but it should be done peacefully not violently. That was the right approach. It's completely crazy for us to be ditching that approach and to be like willfully antagonizing China over a place filled with Chinese! It's fucking stupid!" He also says it's simply not credible to tell the Chinese that Taiwan matters to the West as much as it matters to them: "Do you think the Chinese are sitting there thinking 'okay we know that Taiwan is completely existential for us and America also thinks it's existential for them'? No, of course not, of course that's not what they're thinking, because it isn't! So you can't just go around threatening nuclear war over something where it's not actually a credible threat. Where people think 'either it's complete bullshit or they are actually insane'." He says mutually assured destruction in Europe with the USSR was credible because "there the argument for America was 'we are defending the western world, we have NATO, there is a NATO agreement on mutual self defense, and if you breach that and you attack one of us then it means war against everyone.' That was a lot lot lot more credible than 'there's a little island off the Chinese coast that has absolutely nothing to do with us historically at all, it's full of Chinese people, but we're gonna threaten potential nuclear war over it.' It's totally non-credible and doing it makes you sound mad."
3:25

This is incredible: Dominic Cummings (the former Chief Adviser to the British Prime Minister) calling the current Western policy on Taiwan "completely insane" and "'f*cking stupid". Exceedingly rare to see former senior officials abandon political correctness to this extent, and tell the raw, unvarnished truth. Actually pretty refreshing! Here is what he says: He says that a war over Taiwan with China, is "obviously not" worth it and that "it's completely crazy" for the West to be ditching the One-China policy that aims at peacefully reuniting Taiwan and the mainland: "[A war over Taiwan with China] is a completely insane idea. It's an island that you can see from the Chinese coast. It's full of Chinese people. The people in in the army are cousins of the people in the opposite army. For decades we've had a One-China policy accepted by Democrats and Republicans across the western world [where Taiwan is] going to be unified but it should be done peacefully not violently. That was the right approach. It's completely crazy for us to be ditching that approach and to be like willfully antagonizing China over a place filled with Chinese! It's fucking stupid!" He also says it's simply not credible to tell the Chinese that Taiwan matters to the West as much as it matters to them: "Do you think the Chinese are sitting there thinking 'okay we know that Taiwan is completely existential for us and America also thinks it's existential for them'? No, of course not, of course that's not what they're thinking, because it isn't! So you can't just go around threatening nuclear war over something where it's not actually a credible threat. Where people think 'either it's complete bullshit or they are actually insane'." He says mutually assured destruction in Europe with the USSR was credible because "there the argument for America was 'we are defending the western world, we have NATO, there is a NATO agreement on mutual self defense, and if you breach that and you attack one of us then it means war against everyone.' That was a lot lot lot more credible than 'there's a little island off the Chinese coast that has absolutely nothing to do with us historically at all, it's full of Chinese people, but we're gonna threaten potential nuclear war over it.' It's totally non-credible and doing it makes you sound mad."

Arnaud Bertrand

131,636 просмотров • 1 год назад

Just read through Trump’s interview with The New York Times and really appreciated what he had to say about the New START Treaty between the U.S. and Russia. The New START treaty is set to expire on February 5, 2026. It is the last nuclear arms treaty between the U.S. and Russia that prevents the two powers from rapidly expanding their nuclear arsenals. Trump said in the interview that he wants the deal to be made even stronger because there are a lot of weapons that Russia has that it does not cover, including their battlefield nukes and the Poseidon nuclear torpedo. He added that if it does expire he will make sure that a new "better agreement" is put into place. If the New START Treaty is continued, the U.S. would slow down Russia’s ability to churn out new missiles and nuclear warheads while the U.S. modernizes its ICBM arsenal and builds its new Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines. This could also have the added effect of saving taxpayers' money by not triggering a new arms race that would strain the Pentagon’s budget and an industrial base that is being revamped. He even added that he wants a treaty that limits China’s nuclear weapons as they are rapidly increasing their stockpile to compete with the U.S. and Russia. As can be seen in the video below, Trump reiterated the same position back in August, saying that he wants all 3 nations to limit their nuclear weapons
0:35

Just read through Trump’s interview with The New York Times and really appreciated what he had to say about the New START Treaty between the U.S. and Russia. The New START treaty is set to expire on February 5, 2026. It is the last nuclear arms treaty between the U.S. and Russia that prevents the two powers from rapidly expanding their nuclear arsenals. Trump said in the interview that he wants the deal to be made even stronger because there are a lot of weapons that Russia has that it does not cover, including their battlefield nukes and the Poseidon nuclear torpedo. He added that if it does expire he will make sure that a new "better agreement" is put into place. If the New START Treaty is continued, the U.S. would slow down Russia’s ability to churn out new missiles and nuclear warheads while the U.S. modernizes its ICBM arsenal and builds its new Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines. This could also have the added effect of saving taxpayers' money by not triggering a new arms race that would strain the Pentagon’s budget and an industrial base that is being revamped. He even added that he wants a treaty that limits China’s nuclear weapons as they are rapidly increasing their stockpile to compete with the U.S. and Russia. As can be seen in the video below, Trump reiterated the same position back in August, saying that he wants all 3 nations to limit their nuclear weapons

Ryan Saavedra

115,596 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад