正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

You have problem of comprehension? The General is talking about the disconnect between Chinese political leadership and the PLA, not between Indian leadership and the Army! Any sane person who listens to the full excerpts in this clip can come to that conclusion. You tried to snip the last...

27,261 次观看 • 6 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

🚨 Former commanding general of the US Army Pacific Charles Flynn says we've been neglecting a key component of the Taiwan invasion threat. "In the United States, we look at the map and we see blue. We see an ocean…and we say, well, we can solve this problem with more ships, more subs, more airplanes, more jets, more precision guide munitions, more satellites." While many experts fixate on the Chinese navy as the "center of gravity" for any Taiwan assault, Charles Flynn disagrees. "My view is you can't invade Taiwan with the Chinese Navy and the Chinese Air Force. You actually have to deliver an invasion force, and that is its Chinese army. That's the PLA." "You've got to watch the PLA army, because it will take time for them to actually move from their garrisons to the coast, load those vessels, and get across. You're not going to see and have that kind of time with air power and naval power from the Chinese. There'll be some indicators, but when they start moving that army, then there's a problem. Things need to stop very quickly. …What keeps me up at night is their ability to actually pull that off in 96 hours. …Anything that we can do to slow down that timeline, feed doubt, sow paranoia and introduce new dilemmas to the Chinese leadership--then we are on a stronger footing by way of deterrence and denying them the ability to think that they could pull that off." (And yes, for those wondering, Charles is General Mike Flynn’s brother, with a distinguished career of his own).

Jan Jekielek

236,564 次观看 • 8 个月前

Steve Jobs: The difference between good people and great people is 50-to-1 “I’ve always considered part of my job was to keep the quality level of people in the organizations I work with very high. I mean that’s what I consider one of the few things I can contribute individually myself — versus the team that work with — is to really try to instill in the organization the goal of having only A players.” Steve argues this is especially important in technology where there’s a huge range between the best person and the worst person: “In a lot of fields, the difference between, say, the worst taxicab driver and the best taxicab driver to get you across town in Manhattan might be 2-to-1. The best one will get you there in 15 minutes, the worst one will get you there in half an hour… Or the best cook and the worst cook, maybe it’s 3-to-1… But in the field that I’m in. In software in particular. The difference between the best person and the worst person is about 100-to-1 or more.” He continues: “The difference between a good software person and a great software person is probably 50-to-1 or 25-to-1. Huge dynamic range. And therefore, I have found — and not just in software but in almost everything I’ve done — it really pays to go after the best people in the world.” But as Steve points out, this isn’t always easy: “It’s very painful when you have some people that are not the best people in the world, and you have to get rid of them. But I’ve found that my job has sometimes been exactly that, to get rid of some of the people that didn’t measure up. And I’ve always tried to do it in a humane way, but nonetheless it has to be done and it’s not ever fun.”

Startup Archive

45,180 次观看 • 7 个月前