- US Adm. John Aquilino said China’s military is building up at a rate not seen since World War II.
- That puts it on the path to meeting its goal of being ready to invade Taiwan by 2027, he said.
- Aquilino, the outgoing head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, urged Washington to accelerate military development.
China’s rapid military build-up is more expansive than anything seen since World War II, which means it’s on track with its 2027 goal to be ready for a Taiwan invasion, said US Navy Adm. John Aquilino.
“All indications point to the PLA meeting President Xi Jinping’s directive to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027,” Aquilino wrote in a testimony to the US Armed Services House Committee.
“Furthermore, the PLA’s actions indicate their ability to meet Xi’s preferred timeline to unify Taiwan with mainland China by force if directed,” added the admiral, the outgoing head of the US Indo-Pacific Command.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“All indications point to the PLA meeting President Xi Jinping’s directive to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027,” Aquilino wrote in a testimony to the US Armed Services House Committee.
“Furthermore, the PLA’s actions indicate their ability to meet Xi’s preferred timeline to unify Taiwan with mainland China by force if directed,” added the admiral, the outgoing head of the US Indo-Pacific Command.
He and Assistant Defense Secretary for the Indo-Pacific Command Ely Ratner both said the threat of direct conflict between the US and China is “neither immediate nor inevitable,” but that the Pentagon must move fast to reduce the risk of war.
This year, the Indo-Pacific Command flagged in a priority wish list that it hoped for $11 billion more than the funds allocated by the White House, with $430 million requested for the Guam missile defense system, per documents obtained by Politico Pro.
Meanwhile, US leaders have been concerned with Xi’s mandate to make China’s military a “world-class” force by 2027, as the White House fears that Beijing seeks to supplant the US as the dominant power in the Indo-Pacific and eventually the rest of the globe.
The purge and reports of graft materially affecting China’s arsenal triggered questions internationally about the true strength of the People’s Liberation Army, and if Xi’s military goals have been delayed.
The original article contains 646 words, the summary contains 221 words. Saved 66%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
outgoing head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, urged Washington to accelerate military development.
Better yet. Instead of spending a trillion dollars to gear up to join WW3, how about spend that money to develope domestic manufacturing so we can completely embargo all imports from China. Stay out of conflicts between other nations.
Hit them in the economy and it will hurt them far more than hitting them with bombs, plus the bonus effect of not wasting thousands if not millions of human lives.
Would you rather the Chinese be allowed to have their way with the entirety of the Asia-Pacific region? Based on what we’ve seen in Hong Kong I don’t think that’s a good idea.
Paradoxically, a large standing army will mean less likelihood of conflict. Deterrence works.
That is the thing. We funded the Chinese build up. Stupid to fund a hostile nation.
We shouldn’t do business with China, period. Not only would our economy grow like crazy, but China would decline and become less of a threat to the world.
Ironically could have learnt something from China. Just said fuck you we got everything we need on this side and close the border.
stay out of conflicts between other nations
Exactly. There’s no way Hitler’s will try to take Poland. Even if he does, it’s not like the Nazis or Japanese would attack the US.
Your analogy is not a 1:1 representation of the situation at hand and only serves to distract people from the subject.
I think less of people who always resort to analogies, because they just reduce complicated situations into ones that are easier for their small minds to comprehend.
That’s all well and good, but I just don’t understand. Can you rephrase that in how it relates to an Olympic size swimming pool?
Americans can’t afford housing, homelessness is increasing, healthcare is unaffordable; and you want its population to support teabagging the rest of the world like it’s 1945. When militaries spread themselves thin, without the nation taking care of its home population, that spells trouble. Ask Rome.
All of those problems are because of political corruption, not raw money in/out. The US spends 3.5% of GDP on military, a lot, but not the most. Ranked #10 globally for military spending per GDP. Russia spends more than the US.
US is not Rome, at least not yet, or anytime in the immediate future.
How much is this fearmongering to justify increased military spending and how much is this true? This is the second article I’ve seen in 2 days about “unprecedented” military buildup in Russia and China.
War is fucking stupid. Anyone who wants war is fucking stupid. China and Russia’s autocrats are evil stupid, but are they stupid enough to create another great conflict that we all have to suffer through? Why the sudden change now? Russia tried the quick takeover and that’s failed miserably, drawing them into a prolonged conflict with high casualties.
With all that said, I also recognize the US is a declining world power (from the absolute top to now in competition with others) and stories like this are excellent for drumming up movements to try and maintain that absolute power position.
So how much is this article (and other recent ones) US propaganda?
I agree with the other guy. The media made sound bytes of Trump during his first presidential run because it was popular and directly contributed to him winning, which is now a problem for all of us.
My skepticism arises from similar articles saying the same thing about Russia, though those had more analysis about the transition to a wartime economy, that come at the same time as this article.
I’m concerned media article like this are primers for accepting conflicts down the line as there seems to be a looming threat of greater conflict that’s being highlighted here. I’m an advocate of working together and see war as an incredibly stupid objective so part of this may be just not wanting to believe humans are this stupid.
You shouldnt be naive to the point you belive this is a mistake or product of stupidity. Those people know very well what they are doing
Maybe one day they can attain the freedom status of the exceptional USA.
I’m all against populist and authoritarian regimes, but taking them out of the table, fuck USA.
Errr, Taiwan people should fight their own battles.
Just like Haitians and Africans.
Or, let me guess: it’s okay for the West to defend Whites. It’s okay for the West to defend Asians. But it’s not okay for the West to defend Blacks.
Actions do speak louder than words, after all. Better to fight China’s armies than Haiti’s gangs.
(This is why I never take popular sentiment seriously anymore. Too many useful idiots incapable of critical thinking.)
To be honest, that graph is a bit worrying especially if you look at PPP. I’m not saying “China will build more aircraft carriers than the US” or some such nonsense. I’m saying there is no point going to 300 bil if you don’t want to fight the US. India is their other closest rival.
I’m not sure they would succeed, but I’m worried they might try.
The thing that’s always so misleading about these numbers is that everything costs more in the US to begin with. A lot of that expense is just for US labor, which costs more per person than at least most countries. The graph is a lot more reasonable when you do [% of gdp] (https://www.statista.com/statistics/266892/military-expenditure-as-percentage-of-gdp-in-highest-spending-countries/)
I think they’re probably more worried about the us invading them. We’re the ones who’ve been invading countries most in the past 100 years, not china.
KSA being on this chart is an imposter because they can’t even defeat the Houthis by themselves lmao.
All that funding is to buy and bribe the US military to maintain their own bases in the country to keep themselves secure.
All that money isn’t going to mean much without experience to back it up.
The US military could crumble once people start dying and plans/equipment start failing.
We could find out that the US has just been taken for a ride by military contractors. Western equipment certainly didn’t turn the tides in the Ukraine war like people on these forums thought it would.
The us military is constantly experiencing warfare.
If anyone in that pic turns out to have been swimming naked it’ll be the chinese
The current Chinese state did not exist before WW2, so I think that comparison is a bit odd
I believe they’re comparing the scale seen before WW2 in general, not China itself.
