• China missiles filled with water, not fuel: US intelligence
  • Xi seeking to root out corruption, prepare military for combat

US intelligence indicates that President Xi Jinping’s sweeping military purge came after it emerged that widespread corruption undermined his efforts to modernize the armed forces and raised questions about China’s ability to fight a war, according to people familiar with the assessments.

The corruption inside China’s Rocket Force and throughout the nation’s defense industrial base is so extensive that US officials now believe Xi is less likely to contemplate major military action in the coming years than would otherwise have been the case, according to the people, who asked not to be named discussing intelligence.

104 points

China missiles filled with water, not fuel: US intelligence

oops

US officials now believe Xi is less likely to contemplate major military action in the coming years than would otherwise have been the case

So this is a good news story.

permalink
report
reply
37 points
*

Mmm.

Hopefully.

Unless you think war is inevitable.

The current Chinese doctrine in a theoretical conflict with America relies heavily on saturation of missile defenses to take out things like carrier groups.

If they didn’t know they’d have a 10% failure rate or whatever it could have completely invalidated their tactics.

But it you accept both that war is inevitable and that China will be the aggressor it would have been better for them not to discover this and thus be unprepared for the conflict, like we see with Russia and Ukraine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

War isn’t inevitable. Back in the cold war it was averted multiple times, and the USSR had a much more closed economy than China’s. China going to war with NATO would lose them all their largest trading partners.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

They don’t want a war with NATO. But they might want to invade Taiwan which pretty much everybody in NATO kind of agrees is sort of China’s anyway. Only a handful of nations recognise Taiwan as sovereign, and they ain’t coming to the rescue.

We don’t really want them to take Taiwan, but the only bargaining tool we have to stop them is the threat of stopping trade. And as far as I can tell, the main reason we don’t recognise Taiwan is because we don’t want China to stop trade either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

No one builds a trillion dollar navy without intending to use it, but sure.

It might not happen.

In a world that solves its energy crisis and stops climate change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Unless you think war is inevitable.

I don’t think it’s inevitable, but I do hope that one day West Taiwan will be liberated.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

If China ever wants to be able to take Taiwan, it’ll have to do so within the next few years. Due to a large number of factors, like economy weakening due to over ballooning, an upcoming extreme population decline (they have a serious problem on their hands there alone) and more, they find themselves in the best position to grab and conquer Taiwan now, or never. I do expect the next 4 years in this world to be shit, no matter what US president we get, just a matter of “really shit” or “holy fucking hell its the end times” shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It’s absolutely wild to me that people can say this kind of thing with a straight face, with no knowledge of the actual numbers involved, unknowingly reenacting the attitudes of Spaniards on their way to conquer those filthy English heretics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

While having China’s rockets fail at a high rate during an invasion would be good. They may be weaker by the time they rebuild their arsenal and an invasion is not possible. They are going to have to check a huge amount of rockets then start rebuilding. A lot can change in 2 years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I mean…the US Navy is roughly 40 times more capable than the Chinese navy just looking at aircraft carriers compared, nevermind the carrier group components or the planes. A US super carrier is so much more capable than the 2 Chinese carriers combined.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

China’s ship building capacity is greater than the US. They may be able to overwhelm the US Navy in an extended conflict.

That said, China is looking at a demographic cliff from the One Child Policy. Too many old people and not enough young ones to take care of them. If they’re going to start a war, it has to be in the next few years or not at all. It’s possible the window is already closed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Imagine what their demographics would look like if they also started a war and killed their young people though.

Not saying they won’t do it, and they do currently have an excess of young men specifically, but a country with a population problem isn’t in a great place to start a war imo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

They can’t. China is a green-water navy with but-water dreams, but a complete lack of ability to produce the right type of ships for the task. Their missile boats are concerns in littoral areas, but effectively worthless anywhere else, and that’s all they can produce at any appreciable speed. Their carriers aren’t even sea worthy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

That’s like saying if we produce enough preschoolers fast enough we might be able to overwhelm that SWAT team.

The US Navy could likely sink their entire fleet without losing anything of significance outside of ammunition and fuel, it doesn’t matter how fast they can build such inferior ships.

When it comes to engaging with developed nations the US doesn’t do extended conflicts, that’s a luxury of third world occupations. We’d take out their Navy and then invade or force a surrender based on extended range weapons.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

A war can also solve another problem China has: too many men and too few women. War deaths will not only reduce the man to female ratio, but as in past Chinese wars soldiers will bring home war “brides”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

China would need to build ships faster then the US can build antiship missiles. The US has thousands of stealthy Long Range Anti Ship Missiles. The only thing that quantity of ships would do is make a bunch of reefs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

And there’s what, 7 to 10 of em?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Of which? Last I looked at Wiki the US has 11 aircraft carriers in service.

China with two ramped smaller ones. Apparently one was formerly a casino and the other is a clone.

Tonnage is another decent metric. US has 4.6 million tons to Chinas 2.

The capability of the tonnage is a whole other twist. Force multipliers like mid air refueling, AWACs, stealth etc

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Time to get the South China sea under control. What are they gonna do? Start a water balloon fight?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Except for the families of those related to this flop.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

That’s an occupational risk when working for a corrupt one-party state.

permalink
report
parent
reply
56 points

China missiles filled with water, not fuel: US intelligence

Somebody fucked up the actual story somewhere along the way. A normal problem with liquid ICBMs like a DF5 is tiny amounts of water contamination in propellant. N2O4 is meant to sit in a missile for months but if even just the humidity in the air gets in to it, it forms nitric acid and corrodes the missile. That happened to US ICBMs like the Titan II constantly and the US never reliably stopped it, they just switched to solid fuel. If contractors cut corners building a silo water contamination causing corrosion is the first thing that would go wrong. Meth heads siphoning rocket fuel and trying to replace it with water and dying instantly in a massive explosion didn’t happen.

permalink
report
reply
15 points

I hate to be that guy, but source?

All the info I could find is derived from the Bloomburg article, which clearly says “water instead of fuel”, and also silo doors that don’t fully open lmao

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*

The accusations as I understand it is the fuel never got to the missile, it was sold black market elsewhere and someone filled the missile with water instead because you can’t really check it given how it reacts with moisture in the air.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

No source it’s just pretty much physically impossible. Even if there’s no safety system setting off alarms N2O4/UDMH is denser than water, you can’t fit enough water in the rocket to make it weigh like it’s full of fuel, it’s going to read like 20% is missing either way. And if nobody cares about that why are you putting anything in it at all?

Water contamination and the 100 ton armored door not working are both super likely results of generals embezzling money, water instead of fuel is dumb and Bloomberg has a track record of fucking up this kind of thing

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

So your proof is just that you think your scenario is more plausible than what Bloomburg reported?

permalink
report
parent
reply

Bro but like chinese walter white??? /wwww

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
52 points

Putin has the same problem. Perhaps it made Xi look for it.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

100%

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

For Putin corruption is not a problem, it’s a feature. How else you think he got his palace? Yacht? Another yacht?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

palace

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

A significant delay could be the ballgame in Taiwan for the foreseeable future.

The B-21 will be in service in 2027 and sixth generation fighters a few years later. The Chinese will need a very long time to try to come up with countermeasures for the new tech.

permalink
report
reply
18 points

Given how defensive warfare is showing its strength in Ukraine, without air superiority, I doubt China could take the island right now. And I think the US and all of its allies would make life hell for the Chinese. Just submarine warfare would cut Chinese oil off like it did to the Japanese in WWII.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

True, and unlike Russia China is not even remotely self-sufficient. Fuel, food, etc. all imported on a massive scale.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

And unlike Ukraine, Taiwan already has a lot of protection against incoming missiles and no direct border. Having to ship everything by sea makes it so complicated, I believe the only option for china would be to nuke Taiwan. But that would have a whole lot of other repercussions…

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Aww. China invading Taiwan with Super Soakers.

permalink
report
reply
2 points

Water guns and nerfs are now mostly made in China after all.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 284K

    Comments