Your content is genuinely so helpful in coping with the chaos of the modern world. Helped me become much more of a rationalist and pragmatist on socio/political issues and philosophy. A personal thank you for all the informative work you to to be a voice of reason in a cacophony of doomerism
I still think you are wrong about the pendulum being allowed to swing back and the Right-Wing backlash being able to take place. The thing is, Socialism is not the real foundation of the Left, it is MALTHUSIAN in nature. This is why the Democrats flipped straight from Slavery to Socialism in the 1800s. Socialism is just a front. Malthus predicted that the world could never support more than a Billion human beings in the 1700s. It does not matter how many times and how badly this sort of thing is proven wrong; it codifies and legitimizes one of the sickest human weaknesses; Fear of other human beings. Fear leads to phobia, and to hate. This explains why each and every single policy enacted by the Left htis century has had a negative effect on humanity overall, and why every word coming out of the media is designed to trick everyone on Earth into hating everyone else. It is leading to madness .... at the point of origin. They do believe their own hype, which is why the Left is becoming more and more irrational at an ever increasing rate. IMHO, this could lead the Left (who indeed are the establishment) to use WMDs against the American people. Yes, the Far left is insane and evil, but they are also not even close to being as clever as they think they are. Thus, they might believe that they can nuke just parts of the country and their favored places will still be fine. This would be FAR from the worst abuse of data in recent years...... and General Flintstone (miley) has already proven to be more loyal to the CCP than to the office of the Presidency. I really hope you are more right than I am about all that, but it becomes less of a hope every day. In any case, folks your age are headed for interesting times. Xi is also headed backwards, as you said, but he is verifiably ready to slaughter ANY number of his own people to maintain power. Are his cronies here really all that different? In any case, it is a fact that no member of the CCP has any interest in the continued existence of anyone that is not both Chinese and a Communist. Period.
OK a quick note on why Ukraine looks more like WW2 and WW1 than Desert Storm. Its Air Superiority. Or rather the lack thereof. Modern Maneuvre warfare relies on one faction having control of the skies. Ukraine is a stalemate of contested airspace over the entire front line. Neither side can fly along the front let alone take control at the moment. Thus pinning both forces in place and causing a reversion to WW2 and WW1 doctrine.
Pakistan doesn't have a Civil War *Because* they are 64% first cousin Marriages according to the World Health 0rg. This was a stat around 2014ish . They won't fight their Family, everybody is a Hillbilly out there.
It's funny How the First World War was once regarded as the "War to End All Wars" but the grim truth is no matter how terrible the last great war was, it only set the stage for the next one.
@@steven3837 not true even after the 2nd WW for example wars still happend its just that with nuclear weapons The Great Powers could no longer directly fight each other. Can't fight directly? Then proxy wars, regime change or wars with weaker and non nuclear armed nations became the next best thing. Even minor powers went to war with one another. And many of those wars had WW2 Vets. WW2 after all was Full of WW1 Vets.
We still haven't done "The War That Ends Warfare". The idea has long been that if we made wars terrible enough, no one would fight them. And the "Long Peace" is proof, no one yet has the desire to just blow literally everything up.
There was a joke going around in the mid-1980s about Reagan & Gorbachev. After both had died and gone to heaven they would meet for lunch once a week. One day Gorbachev looks over his side of the cloud and says, "Well, it looks like your stock market is down another thousand points today." Reagan looks over his side of the cloud and says, "Yes, you're right. It also looks like there is renewed fighting on the German/Chinese border."
When I lived in china between 2016-2017 I knew an paratrooper officer in the PLA. He had never jumped out of a plane, paid off his commanding officer so he didn’t have to attend and his whole unit were involved in the smuggling of hashish.
Everything is possible. In the USA you can become an admiral in a landlocked state. You can become a general without any education or experience, but only because you are of the right race and sexual orientation. There are a lot of strange things in the world, so you can believe in a paratrooper without jumping.
3:24 "There's no one in the American alliance structure who looks like they want to declare war on anyone else in it" With the possible exceptions of Turkey and Greece
@@Kaiserboo1871 And Greece can't afford a war with Turkey, considering that it has 1/8th the population (one which is declining rapidly, as most of Europe is).
Lol Turkey ultimate goal is to recreate the later ottoman empire, so Greece is in their list, but it is in the bottom of that list they still need to beat out Iran ,saudi, Egypt , and Israel in the middle east before they can turn on the Greece
Whatifaltist underestimates how much better governments have gotten at preventing rebellion. Chinese rebellion in five years? Everyone thought Iran would have collapsed, but it didn't.
Rebellions aren't as common today not just because governments got better at preventing them and historically any rebellion can be prevented as long as the population is getting their 3 meals a day. It's also because in the modern day people want to prevent the suffering and bloodshed that comes with rebellion and subsequent civil war.
Iran's suffered multiple rebellions and has mostly sustained itself through a mixture of censorship and raw brutality, as well as lack of will by many others to support the rebels. The CCP has thousands of protests every single day but because nobody wants to poke the Dragon on its home turf too hard and the Great Firewall we don't hear as much about it. I'm not saying governments won't prevent rebellions, but just that it is a possibility.
An alliance built around a common enemy, only survives as long as the enemy. A great deal of diplomacy that's happened in my lifetime, domestic or foreign, has revolved around preseving traditional enemies.
The fact remains Nato is more of a energy cartel that does military drills than a cohesive alliance since the threat doesn’t exist. It died 30 years ago. Russia is not interested in “conquering Europe” and neither is China even if they had the means there’s no short term benefit other than keeping Europe out of their internal and regional affairs to merit the expense. As things stand in practice NATO members act in conflicts around the world knowing that as long as the pact exists and the USA foots the bill there’s no threat of repercussions other than the occasional terrorist attack or wave of terrorist attacks which is a pill most MEPs can swallow before going to bed at night. With the exception of Russia there’s kinda no scenario were they don’t push the button before allowing NATO to partion them or if the conditions become such that it becomes unable to keep the reduced regional power capacity it holds today
@@GAndreC >Russia is not interested in exanding their domain anymore >Russia invades Ukraine >Putin says Ukraine is a fake nation that belongs to Russia
Tbh, *NOBODY* wants smoke with Vietnam, lol.😂 Though China vs Vietnam is like Russia vs Finland, i.e. doesn't/didn't go very well for the "superior" country, hahaha!😅
@@ray495903314 I’d love to and I’d love to make sure my family does as well. At least after the war we can build a nation with the values it once had not these disgusting values of modernity
Nah, nukes won’t be used. The only one who is willing to use total war tactics is Putin and he’s actually far more incompetent than people think as we’ve seen in Ukraine.
Drones really have been a game changer in Ukraine, its almost impossible to conduct any troop movement without the other side knowing about it, they help guide artilery and missles with pinpoint precision, and the Iranian kamikaze Drone and civilian drones armed with small explosives have proven effective and extremely cost efficient weapons
But if short-range advanced camera-linked waepons such linked to cost-effective measures such as laser-weaponry, which the US are researching, turn out to be effective, there might be a viable counter-strategy that neither Russia or Ukraine is deploying atm.
@@emilsohn1671 lasers are extremely specialised weapons systems that have at best a few km of range. You would need massive numbers of them to provide any real protection on the strategic level and they are more or less useless against anything other than drones meaning they'd be a logistical liability.
Drones have certainly been effective for both sides and are definitely a change in war, but let's not pretend the whole war has been determined by these drones.
@@pretendtheresaname9213 funniest part is i thought it would be ironic to name my account this despite me being totally on board with "great replacement" like if foreigners whom want kids are coming here let them all come but yeah i have an "any means necessary" on fixing birth rates
@@adolfchadermien When it comes to diverse countries that's a no-brainer, specially if they assimilate right off the bat as they do in the US. For homogeneous countries that's a social, cultural collapse. You can allow immigration from close, more similar countries I suppose - say Japan is ok with Korean and Taiwanese immigration (doubt they would want a chinese population) or how Ukrainians have integrated easily in other Eastern-Central European countries - but even that eventually stops. It doesn't take long for immigrants who assimilate to have similar birth rate to their new country. It's a band-aid and the same issue will rise again.
@@pretendtheresaname9213 yeah with the US my view is more people, my view of homogeneous countries is adapt or die... they are going to have to change if they are wanting to survive new trends and the east asian system is broken due to caring about boomers more than the young. With Taiwanese its less about chinese population and more about the ccp ideas if people want to live in Taiwan they probably dont have the ccp ideas. Honestly something needs to be done to sort of assimilate native citizens towards where immigrants are if it sounds weird because it just seems immigrants have more of a work ethic, more trad values and work harder then the people already here...how can we make our own citizens more like the legal and screw it illegal immigrants
The was in Ukraine is more like WW1 than WW2 arguably. Confused open terrain movements, shifting to defensive lines that devolves into trench warfare. Where the trenches meet settlements they become Verdun like. It's a war of attrition where airpower doesn't make or break actions but artillery does. Infantry attacks are usually small unit probes trying to infiltrate static defense lines
I agree but air power will make a difference once they eliminate Ukraines soviet Era air defence systems fully. They are still very effective but as the Russians target them more and more they are now becoming able to use glide bombs launched from aircraft and it is devastating.
@@sonneh86 When I hear that Russia is the main exporter of fertilizer in the world, what I internalize is that they've been the largest exporter of explosives for that same amount of time. It doesn't matter what aircraft you send, no one has the bombs to drop in the West. The infrastructure to process massive amounts of Tri-nitro-toluene and other compounds simply doesn't exist, and at least for the US our rail lines have become notoriously dangerous within the past 6 months. Send jets all you want, they're going to just be expensive taxis if we don't have bombs.
@@HANUMAN7454 lol, good luck taking out all the "soviet era air defenses", when even their best jets and helicopters are routinely taken down my shoulder fired missiles. There is a reason why Russia rarely uses its air "superiority", and it's not just because of (near)static air defense systems.
Your last paragraph about “more girls for you, if you survive” is exactly how the professor from “All quiet on the western front” convinced the boys to volunteer for the army. To be fair, they do get laid, but all of them also die by the end of the book.
he's literally fearmongering to help his audience of obnoxious young men who can't deal with peace LARP like they are going over the top any minute to die in a war. When, in reality, something like WWI is never going to happen in the modern world. if there's total war, men and women will die alike in nuclear hellfire. and if there isn't, there won't be a draft, and professional soldiers will be the only ones fighting, most armies of which are gender integrated. quit it with your childish fantasies of survival of the fittest and implied r*pe and get a fucking hobby
That's not really what althist was arguing. And actually... I'd argue that's potentially worse. In AQOTWF, all the dudes go to brothels, what althist is saying is that by the time the war is over, there will be far fewer men because so many will have died, so the girls will have to compete over the men rather than the other way around, which would make the whole thing so much easier. Only problem is, that's what happened in Russia after WW2 and the result is women dropped their standards for men so hard that they were no longer doing things like... forcing the men to not get drunk constantly, and doing stupid risky things that got them killed, which is why Russian society is so shit and Russian male life expectancy is so fucking low. Women still need some leverage over men to force them to make their lives better or they just won't.
As an Indian, I want to make this very sure, we do not have any reason to fight against anyone. Our issues with China are not ideological or religious. It is borders at 20000 ft+. It is not something India and China will be exterminating each other for. We have good relations with US and Russia as well. We are not anyone's 'ally against autocracy' nor are we in any 'anti-colonial' warrior. Keep us out of this but good luck to everyone fighting. May the best nation win. Thanks for all the comments. For people commenting about Pakistan. Pakistan will not be able to harm us per say. Their elite knows it. So, they will take every penny out of that state and fill their coffers until it is no longer possible. Pakistan was created by the British as a garrison state for precisely two reasons. 1) Stop USSR expansion into Indian subcontinent. 2) Contain India. USSR is history. And the West powers want us to stand up to China, not to contain us anymore. So, Pakistan is a useless piece in the chessboard now. Its job is done and might implode soon (next 10 years). An added comment based on the argument in the comments related to India-China-Pakistan capabilities in case a war does happen. I think Pakistani airforce > Indian airforce(IAF). IAF uses backdated machines that are not at all good enough for 2023. The best we have is 36 Rafale aircrafts. In terms of weapons quality, US weapons > Russian weapons. India uses mostly Russian planes whereas Pakistani airforce uses F-16's. Those are pretty potent weaponry even today. Apart from airforce, I think Indian Navy is pretty superior to Pakistani Navy in almost all aspects. Ground military is similar in quality in terms of training and strategies, can't really call one of them "superior" to the other. But wars require more than machines & manpower. It requires logistics, fuel, food, money & international diplomatic support. Pakistan hugely lacks in these aspects. In terms of India-China, India lacks everywhere. Army, navy, airforce, economy, infrastructure, logistics and even in nuclear weapons. Geography does help India though considering Chinese exports pass underneath us which runs their economy. Indian nuclear weapons have a yield of about are around 50 kilotons, Chinese nuclear weapons have a yield of around 4 megatons, also more in number. But India does have allies. I believe if US can get it's act together internally, they can defeat China. US weapons are top notch. No one comes close. India wants US, UK and EU support for deterring & containing China's rise for the next 20 years and invest in India for the next 20 years after which India will have the same capabilities that China has today. I am already seeing it happen in real time. Indian govt is spending incredible amounts on infrastructure & logistics across the country which includes ports, airports, semi high speed & high speed railway lines, expressways etc. All US & European software companies were always here since 2000's. Now we are seeing manufacturing moving here. 20 years from now, the capability scene will be different than that of today.
I sympathize with your sentiment, but not all wars are of our own choosing; it's likely that we'll be forced into a brief, limited but intense war with China in the Himalayas.
Technically 100% of the human race could potentially be sent off to fight in a war (Child soldiers, elderly reservists already demonstrate the possibility) but yeah, if you're a male and you are between the age of 21-70 you're going to participate in a war in your lifetime
I disagree that drones did not really affect the how wars are fought in fact, drones have a massive effect in terms of artillery and missle targetting etc. I agree that the Russo Japanese war shaped WW1 and Ukraine war will shape WW3, and I think drones will be much upgraded that what it is now, like being more relaible , more rugged cheaper to build, with accurate in terms of weapons handling. etc.
That all sounds like ‘fighting the last war but better’ territory and not the complete shakeup people usually mean when they say something revolutionizes war.
@@joshuamitchell5018 well drones were used in past wars first time usage was during WW2, when the Germans were raining drone bombs over the UK. Modern day drone warfare started during the Invasion of Lebanon in 82 where the Israelis used drones as decoys for Syrian SAMs. and also spoofed Syrian radars. Drones are revolutionary in this war as its seen the mass use of drones on a scale not seen in past wars. and witih inventive ways . Also the Ukrainians got to practice NATO doctrine and weapons on Russia which was the intended enemy.
I think AI will also be a massive revolution for the military during WW3. All World Wars created massive technological changes and I wouldnt be suprised that Drones/AI become the new revolution like the tanks did during WW1.
Drones and satellites have had a huge strategic impact on the Russo-Ukraine War (2022 - ???). In WW1, a key problem was that even though the front was long, it was very difficult to amass enough soldiers for a major breakthrough due to observation aircraft - both fixed wing and balloons. We are seeing the same thing now. In WW2, the Germans controlled the skies over the Russian Front until late 1943, so they could usually detect massing Soviet forces. If Hitler was still around, satellites and drones would keep spotting his forces massing and the blitzkriegs would slam right into the enemy's massed firepower and defenses that had been alerted. I think this is why we see trenches, snipers, machine guns, and artillery dominating the Ukrainian battlefields - too many eyes in the sky again.
As an Indian, I'm not fighting a war for someone else. Last time we Indians had to do that, it was WW2 and even then, we had absolutely no business setting our foot in Europe with guns in hand.
I agree that the Indian people were badly mistreated in WW2. The world has changed however. No one would or could force you to fight, but neutrality has its price too. It means, in the case of a conflict, you’d stand alone against Pakistan and China. Not only in a military escalation but also in terms of economic warfare. If I were you I’d consider this. India is far too big and important to stay out of world politics. Eventually it might have to make a choice.
@@tempo5366 Have you ever seen two drunk people fighting outside a pub? This Ukraine war is like that. You get involved in the fight only if you are more friendly to any one guy. The other option is you are the police officer who wants to break off the fight. In the context of Ukraine war, we are neither the police officer, nor particularly more friendly to one side over the other. The last option is to help both sides negotiate. We tried that. Turks, Israelis, Chinese, Africans also tried. Neither side is willing to listen at this stage. The Europeans should give it a try, try to talk to both Russia and Ukraine, instead of adding more fuel to the fire. Regarding helping in some war against Pakistan or China, well those wars have already happened and in all cases, the collective West stood against India. Do you know, why India developed its own GPS? Because, during the Kargil war, Indian Airforce was using GPS guided bombs to dislodge Pakistani infiltrators and US decided to switch off GPS in the region. With that kind of precedent, you expect us to trust the same group of people with our national security and territorial integrity? Indian GPS is called Navic. Look it up in Wikipedia.
You look at this too simplisticly. Where the US rules, there is prosperity, look at Germany, Japan, Italy, South Korea, occupied by US after WWII. Where the russians rule, there is poverty and stagnation. Look at Eastern Germany, the whole ex eastern european block, all former soviet states, North Korea. The future of India depends very much upon who wins WWIII. Do not think for a second that if China wins and will dominate the planet, India will have its peace and freedom!
@@3ast3rn3r Feel free to buy a ticket to Warsaw. There will be people who will help you get to Kiev. You are the right kind of candidate they are looking for. I will get my popcorn.
One of the few people who will actually admit being wrong on some predictions. The ability to look at new information and actually update/change an opinion based on it is a rare characteristic. Salute
I also think he's wrong about Pakistan. I don't think they'd go to war with India, if China and India went to war. They don't want their country to completely collapse.
Drones are still relatively new technology for militaries so expecting some grand changes is a bit unrealistic. Still, they have helped improve how scouting is being done.
And even then in the Ucraine war Rusia and the OTAN are massively using drones and misiles. By some thing said in the video I think @Whaitalhist doesn't know that much about military things, the take on that Corea will survive because of their better training an weapons it's like a non existing factor, the only thing preventing NC attacks directly is the US and their bases, because you can give the SC the best arms you can but when the same men that are supposed to serve the country and protect it are demoralized because of how the society they live in (SC) and adding to that there aren't a lot of them, the majority being 30+ doesn't give a nice picture. Interesting how both Koreas represent the extremes of two of the most popular ideologys and in either of both their population in "average" are happy.
As a young man, I really hope this doesn't happen. Not just out of fear of dying and never getting to raise a family, but also fear of having to kill another young man. I remember going to discord servers where you had these muslim young men, they were just like me. They liked to talk about dinosaurs and shit. Perhaps from a different civilization and with much different beliefs about how a society should be run, but people I could joke around with. Unless someone's a sociopath, we're all cut from the same cloth, and I don't know how I could live with myself knowing that I was responsible for some Russian or Chinese mother's son never coming home
As a young person from India, I also hope that we will be able to transcend irrational hatred and dogma that could end up causing tremendous suffering and halt the wheel of progress for decades. The cycle of violence creates no long-term winners. Mahatma Gandhi stressed the importance of ahimsa (non-violence) for a reason: "After all, however sincere my strivings after Ahimsa may have been, they have still been imperfect and inadequate. The little fleeting glimpses, therefore, that I have been able to have of Truth can hardly convey an idea of the indescribable lustre of Truth, a million times more intense than that of the sun we daily see with our eyes. In fact what I have caught is only the faintest glimmer of that mighty effulgence. But this much I can say with assurance, as a result of all my experiments, that a perfect vision of Truth can only follow a complete realization of Ahimsa. To see the universal and all-pervading Spirit of Truth face to face one must be able to love the meanest of creation as oneself." -The Story of My Experiments With Truth Namaste and love from Northern India!🙏🇮🇳☮️☮️
@@TzarTsar There are certain necessary aspects of life, but the idea of what could have been would always be present in my mind during such a moment. It is true, however, that such principles can unfortunately take a backseat in the face of immense anger or misery. Hopefully, something can still remain.
Friend, in every generation there is a war. You can either fight for your country, or watch someone else die for your country. Your choice, but a brave man knows the right one.
As we are seeing in the Russo-Ukraine War (2022 - ???), young men get dragged into the army, trained, sent to the front, and find themselves holding a rifle and listening to bullets whizzing past. If you try to flee, you may be arrested or even shot by your own people. If you are too squeamish to kill the enemy, you can aim over their heads, but at some point he may be closing in to kill you. If you flee, you die. If you keep shooting to miss, you die. It's a fairly unlikely scenario, given the significant logistic needs of a modern military force - lots of jobs behind the front line running drones, intercepting radio traffic, pumping fuel, driving trucks with ammunition, defusing bombs, and so on. However, it is a common scenario throughout history. In the 1500's to 1800's, the rearmost troops on a battlefield was a line of cavalrymen (from the upper classes of society), ready to slash down their sabers on the lower class infantry soldiers trying to escape the battlefield. The weapons have changed, but the social dynamics have not.
@@jwil4286 the south east asian weebs would probably enact what the Korean-Japanese Forces would do with babies since that tale is always told to us no matter how young.
Two uploads in a day? Neat! Rudyard, you should make a video about how the blowback from WW1 and WW2 has affected our modern society. You briefly touched on that on your last video but I'd really love to see you go into detail on how it's affected the psyche and culture of the generations afterwards as a whole. Just an idea.
It's insane how much WW1 changed our society. I believe even worse than WW2. Something just broke inside the collective mind upon seeing such destruction, creating new art forms entirely. WW2 was just the cherry on top, with the first one tuned up to eleven and a lot of warcrimes on top.
Drones are a key factor in Ukraine. That and IR scopes and AWACS and satellite recon. The advantage has swung to the defense. Defenders can see the attackers coming way too easily.
that's a big reason why the Russian cauldron strategy is so powerful. They snake around and invade in an encirclement pattern, then they dig in and become the defenders.
Your mostly right in the wrong way yes defense is busted now but IE scopes aren't a major thing in the Ukraine war neither side really has good ones other then the nato tanks like leopard and abrams being sent, however the AWACS and Satellites are crucial to Ukrainians strategy like you kinda said. As for drones while yes being "important" are not close to breng a game chnager yet. It's actually funny to me because about 2 mouths after the Ukrainian war started I thought that drones and stuff were gonna be super big and important but its mostly been a pretty conventional war drones are just a added layer is all. The only problem I saw with the video was the tank pushes because Ukraine doesn't have enough to do a major tanks assault and russia proved there incompetence in that feild along with many others.
Yeah, this video honestly felt like absolutely very little research was done to back up these claims (particularly regarding military tactics and capability). Artillery and drones are the name of the game in Ukraine, so the complete dismissal of drones put an instant red flag on the rest of the video for me. While standard military tactics are still relevant (and always will be), it's important that such a pivotal tactical pillar not go completely dismissed. This is definitely a fairly disappointing, under-researched video for sure.
@@PercocetPete He admits himself that he is betting against God. I can respect a man who is humble enough to say that his predictions shouldn’t be taken as fact and that he will more then likely be wrong.
I think that "getting men to fight" will be a major issue for quite a few countries. Mostly in 'western' countries. Men went to war because they either had something to win or something to lose. And today? The number of lonely, disregarded and purposeless men is high and growing. Telling men for decades that they are predators, oppressors, toxic and so on, won't help the case either. That leaves "getting women" as the last option to motivate the men needed to fight. But seeing that, already today, between 35 and 60% of young men (depending on country and age range) in the west stopped dating actively because they think that women aren't worth the effort anymore....It's hard to see them being willing to die to protect these exact same women.
The craziest thing about the war in Ukraine is how it has become a resemblance of the first world war, more so than the second. The potency of ground air defense systems and the infantryman's ability to take out low-flying aircraft makes it extremely difficult to establish air superiority, which is the backbone of our doctrine since ww2. Simultaneously, the capability of even the average infantryman to easily and singlehandedly destroy multiple pieces of armor makes armored offensives across the plains a death wish. And if you try to use armor in more concealed areas, you are just as fucked because you're easily ambushed by squads with AT weapons. The result is the opposite of ww2! There are no sweeping offensives, envelopements, or pincers. It has forced the war into an artillery war with soldiers hunkering in trenches. What it comes down to is your infantry taking territory, and that can only be done at great expense. Both sides have learned that the hard way
You missing the point. You don’t see swift maneuvering of IFV and tanks because of its shortage in UAF and terrorists. All mobility capabilities is supplied by West and it is lackluster to not say the least. Thus, it’s just artillery duels, with house to house infantry fighting.
While the comment makes a valid point about the challenges of establishing air superiority and conducting armored offensives in the war in Ukraine, there are other factors at play that resemble the situation in World War I. The most significant factor is the lack of effectiveness of the Russian military, which has been plagued by corruption, supply shortages, and outdated doctrine and culture. Russian tanks and armored vehicles have been easily destroyed by ATGMs, which were developed in the 1980s, highlighting the inadequacy of Russian military technology. Additionally, Russia has not been able to fully utilize its air force due to a shortage of trained pilots and logistical challenges. These factors have contributed to the war in Ukraine devolving into an artillery war, with soldiers entrenched in trenches and engaging in slow and costly battles for territory. Furthermore, Ukraine's lack of forces has prevented them from effectively driving out the Russian military, who have had ample time to dig in and use their conscripted soldiers as cannon fodder. Ukraine also faces the challenge of using Soviet-era equipment, which is outdated and no match for modern weaponry. In summary, while the challenges of establishing air superiority and conducting armored offensives do resemble those of World War I, the primary reason for the current situation in Ukraine is the ineffectiveness of the Russian military. This has forced both sides into slow and costly battles for territory, reminiscent of the trench warfare of World War I.
The West really wants to drag this one out. I do believe we've found a new form of "gray zone" warfare where we feed the defenders just enough to prevent a quick victory on the part of the aggressor, while waiting for the sanctions to cripple the aggressor nation. A quick defeat of Ukraine OR a rapid retreat of Russia would have negated those economic levers to quickly, and call into question the whole "economic sanctions" method of response. Those measures take time to be effective, and a quick defeat or victory would call into question the whole method, as well as forcing a backlash on the politicians who put them in place as they caused pretty significant amount of pain on western countries economies.
Even though you’ve made videos on this exact topic before, I’m excited to see a new one. These days so, so much can change in a single year when it comes to geopolitics and warfare, and I value your perspective more than most.
I just turned 70. I was lucky in that I was in the last lottery draft call with a high number and was not going to be drafted. My friend had an older brother who went to Vietnam. My father fought in the last three months of WWII in Europe and told me he didn't expect to survive any invasion of Japan. He definitely believed the atomic bomb saved him. I have two grandsons. If they really had to go I'd counsel them to avoid becoming an officer. I can sure see why soldiers with experience have little interest in becoming officers. Most young men value their lives and know better than to become heroes. I've read of regiments of 500 men in Europe where every officer has been killed.
My father was a Marine in WWII who started as a private and rose up to sergeant. He was offered a chance to become a second lieutenant, but he asked if that meant his first assignment would probably be commanding a machine-gun nest, and the higher officer said it would. My father turned down the offer.
Perhaps some shot by their own troops.😉In the decadent west you have the professional troops who will fight whoever they are pointed at but after that i can't see many normies getting worked up to take on Russia or China.
@@stevenschnepp576 I'd not mind some elaboration for I have not thought along those lines. It is depressing to consider the tragedy foisted upon Eastern Europe because of Stalin. I have considered what Eisenhower had to have hand in mind. He needed to keep as much of an American Army as he was expected to need to attack Japan. While told of The BOMB he could not know how devastating it was going to be. The wars that you undertake are supposed to be undertaken only for the defense of your nation. Nations of all types of government have only two main duties: Defense first, and then Education a very strong second. There is no duty to be an aggressive nation attacking other nations to take from them their food, as is Baby Stalin's procedure in Ukraine. It is Putin's theft of Ukraines crops. It has been a UN Victory as weakened as the UN has become that food shipments to dependent nations was arranged. Starving to death adds to the weight of the misery that is much of the human experience. It is this weight of misery some thinkers go so far as to use to applaud human extinction. My brother once claimed to have had better days than some ever have as whole lives.
@@jody6851 Well it does pay more, at least there is that. I am reminded of the character in the Tom Hanks Production War in the Pacific about a winner of the Medal of Honor who basically won his medal for having the smarts during combat to move his machine gun before his location was perfectly targeted by the company's Japanese Adversaries. He so felt it was his destiny to be a combat soldier that after a year of selling War Bonds and enlistment drives he returned to be killed in an attack on another of the islands. I believe it was the historian Paul FUssell who wrote the US was losing 4,000 soldiers a day during the campaigns in the Pacific. I need to check that number but I know that it was an amazingly high figure of casualties. Such a high number that it was clearly a better choice to use The Bomb. At this time in world history it is Ukraine that has some severe decisions to make because it will lose when Baby Stalin Putin decides to use nuclear weapons or the finite manpower available to Zelenskyy clearly means defeat for Ukraine. My correspondent of greatest stature and reputation was Andre` Lewin who after a long career as a French Diplomat had become Chairman of the French UN Association offering the world suggestions for the reinvention of the UN. As it stands now the UN, has no effective enforcement capabilities of its own simply triggered by violations of international laws against wars of aggression. Ambassador Lewin in his White Paper believed that the UN required its own army and armed forces. The US asks of Zelenskyy that weapons it provides to him are contingent on his rejection of acts of violence within Russian national borders. For Zelenskyy whose armed forces are not as big and Ukrainians cannot be secure in any way because of its inability to withstand Russian attacks for but so long the option of assassinating Putin somehow loom large. Baby Stalin Putin threatens the life of Ukraine's President and he is known to have sent at least one team out with the mission of assassinating President Zelenskyy. It is simply unfair for the US to expect Ukraine to have a hands off policy towards Russia and the Russian President. The US can afford it, or at least it thinks it can, whereas clearly Ukraine cannot. Regardless of Ukraine's status as a member of Nato, or not, it was promised security when it gave up nuclear weapons.
So rather then one massive mega war like WWII, we will instead see a combination of civil wars and “limited” interstate wars. Often overlapping with some countries fighting a civil war and a world war at the same time (Italy and China did that in WWII).
Yeah, after an initial invasion attempt and being repelled, we might see some skirmishes here and there over a long time. We might see less changes on a map and more on a society wide scale
It has been the the declining population crisis throughout the industrialized world that has soothed my fears of a potential WW3. Internal stability seems to be a serious issue for all potential players involved for the next few decades that my bet is on whoever can solve that first is probably gonna do pretty well in the latter 21st century.
Any time things unexpectedly (or rapidly) change makes war more likely, not less, whether it's because the old power is hoping to get one last hurrah before they lose their dominance or the new kid on the block wants to take advantage of their new power, war is how its done. As for stability, one of the more popular and time tested ways to stabilize a government is to aim their malcontents at an 'evil' foreigner.
@@boobah5643 Wars only boost stability if you win, I don't think anyone in their right mind will say that Russia is more stable now than it was prior to the war. I think the cost to benefit calculus is very much against all of these nations that could potentially start something.
China invasion window is pretty narrow. Taiwan strait weather conditions are notoriously unforgiving with two monsoon seasons. That leaves just two brief "windows of attack" -- May to July and October --for such a large-scale operation, according to a US Naval War College report.
@@hughmungus2760 Can China enforce a blockade? The waters around Taiwan are one of the busiest areas for maritime traffic. A lot of ships, not just those bound for Taiwan, traverse the Straits Crucial imports and exports for Japan, South Korea and even China itself would be at risk The chances of a “misunderstanding” with a Japanese or Korean ship can easily spiral out of control. Japan views sea trade as a matter of existential threat. Tbh i think China is little afraid of Japan We USA could return in kind and blockade china . America possesses the ability to shut down maritime trade in the Straits of Malacca, Hormuz, Suez and Panama. Even if tawian surrenders and china blockade ends. Doesnt mean our blockade would end. If we wanted to be cheeky. We could do a little good cop bad cop with Japan We could make a public annoucment with angry Japansese man pacing i the background. while we agree to end the blockade with China because the blockade of West Taiwan just started. Our closing statement Confucius say Man who cut self while shaving, lose face
@@roman..leave.me.to.my.circles Yes. Simply by declaring a free fire zone in a ring 50 miles around the coast of taiwan. Any non-PLAN ship entering that zone would be automatically fired upon with antiship missiles the moment it is detected by radar. Commercial shipping isn't exactly stealthy and no commercial ship is going to call china's bluff. A blockade of malacca would cripple shipping for japan as well as the rest of asia. US allies in the region would crumple long before china does. Even a selective blockade would create such a logjam in the straits that it might as well be blockaded. As for japan. Oh china is not afraid of it. Infact china has been secretly hoping for a rematch, Those antiship ballistic missiles aren't just intended for american carriers.
@@roman..leave.me.to.my.circles that's why Russia now conducts Pacific fleet exercises, to keep Japan nervous and don't let it concentrate forces on Chinese direction
@@mrobocop1666 Id call that bluff. but i see your point though . I want japan nervous i want them ready. Really if was me id only nominally defend Taiwan. I would prefer to just blockade at the mallaca strait and other choke points Try to dare china to sail out to deep watert and break the blockade forcing a descive battle. Stop trade by sea and maybe civl unrest leads breaks out and CCP loses the mandate of heavan or Give me back my Taiwan Who knows United States might just as easliy collapse from the inside . Im just a guy thinking out lound
Also keep in mind that the PLA has little actually experience. It hasn't proven itself as a fighting force. The only experience it has was the Korean War and the invasion of Vietnam, both of which were stalemates. And some border clashes with India, none of which went well for either side.
The last real war China fought in war in 1979. Meanwhile since the end of the Cold War, America and Russia have fought or are currently fighting major wars. America has fought in the Gulf War, War in Afghanistan, and the Iraq War Russia has fought the Chechnya Wars and the Russo-Ukrainian War.
Experience goes a long ways. I love how the Chinese talk about hypersonic missiles being carrier killers yet they've never conducted a kill chain. How do they expect to identify a target from over 500 miles away, lock on a moving target going 35 knots in the open ocean, then execute the kill. They've never conduct a modern kill chain, ever, so their hypersonic missiles will be a non-factor.
I still cant believe China didnt plow trough Vietnam when Vietnam just got freshly bombed to the stone age by the US, worst of all the ones who held back their invasion wasn't even the battle hardened NVA who actually fought the americans and at the time were in Laos to deal with the Khmer. China's invasion literally got bogged by reservist border Militia troops with little to no combat experience.
@@Kaiserboo1871Yeah fighting against mostly the local militia and border patrol for one month is the most “war experience” the Chinese army have ever gotten over the last decades lol
Calls to mind the War of the Triple Alliance. As a Paraguayan man, you weren't likely to survive, but if you did, the women (who outnumbered the men 8:1) were literally throwing themselves at you.
I believe Taiwan China conflict is the only conflict that could gas light WW3. And depending on how the Russian campaign in Ukraine ends up, that war would be "short" faught. Millions of computer and human made war games of invasion of Taiwan have been made and in almost all Taiwan withstands bc the invasion takes so much time since 1st you would have to embargo Taiwan for long enough to run down their stockpile of air defense missiles. In that time China will out spend itself and face mass famines, total economic collapse and eventually a coup.
Orrrrrrrr, china surrounds the island and bombs it into the ocean. This isn’t 1944 anymore bro, we don’t need a d-day invasion. Emp the shit out of the island and let the people fight themselves for resources and then send the army. Maybe after a year or two
Error one found: 3:22 (Saudi Arabia is not ideologically aligned, at all with any of the countries, it once was ranked 7th most Authoritarian State, with the reamining being African States and #1 being North Korea) NOTE: Yes, Saudi Arabia doesn't have any enemies it would like to annex Terrritory from, although it has-major dispute with Iran, but as of 2023, Saudi Arabia and Iran seem to be trying to build-alliance and then later on NEWS comes out Iran is building military prescence in Iraq. (So idk about a Saudi-Iranian Axis) Another Error: 20:10 Im pretty sure if anything remotely close happens in a situation to where Pakistan and India confront each-other, it wont be anything like the last confontration, I know people like to pretend, but this is real-life. We know the second Pakistan realizes that it's armies are completely falling apart, it will activate the All-Father Weapon and launch all of them at India, leading to a small-scale Nuclear with Pakistan and India. God hope that China wasn't attacking India at the same time, for we could see an Asian Nuclear War, with Russia being minorly effected in some parts of Siberia. 13:15 He seems to be mentioning only China's weakness through-out this video, without speaking on some major Western-issues, such as recruitment issues because the Generation now seems to be having trouble fguring out what gender they are. This is actually not a problem in China. Also yea China may not have the most effecient army, but sometimes in wars. Having larger numbers could be beneficial, Specially if your a country that has more population than your enemies continent.
Saudi and Iran will never be Allies both are competing for influence in the Middle East both have been fighting proxy wars for decades one small agreement brokered by the Chinese 😂(who can’t even beat the Indians in their border or deploy soldiers overseas and lie about each and everything ) won’t change anything. Saudis are still very much dependent on American weapons and American military for protecting itself
yeah, WIAH lives in own shell without keeping in touch with whats happening. There is a larger chance of Saudi allying with china than US...and Turkey is prob not getting involved in any war along with france which just took a neutral stance between China and US And the highlight for me is him predicting Pakistan collapsing and no nuclear apocalypse happening over india...like bruh where are those 160+ warheads gonna go smh
Any recruitment issues would fly right out the window when the government inevitably points out on national television that China has engaged in one of the largest genocides in history, and is actively engaging in crimes against humanity as we speak. Plus, a big reason we have recruitment issues right now is that there's no one to fight. People who join the Army are either looking for a second chance at life, or they want action, probably both. Those people who want action just aren't signing up right now, because we're not really actively engaged in conflict. A war with a clear and present danger would change that in a heartbeat, especially in a country as proud of its nationality as we are. Sure, you look on the internet and you see people hating on everything American, but if you go out into the real world, even on college campuses, you'll find that most people actually really care about this country and want to fight to fix it rather than tear it down. Red and blue, we're very much more similar than we are different. IMHO, the people who want votes or views play up nonexistent differences to create an "us vs them" mindset that drives up engagement. Not only all that, a war would give a lot of directionless and unmotivated individuals a cause to fight for. Maybe not a cause worth dying for, but enough to get them to sign up when a recruiter tells them they can be a mechanic or fuel truck driver.
Read up on the efficiency of the Chinese infantry. They have next to no combat experience and the only reason they would be able to kill anything is if there were a fuck tonne of them, in a wave attack.
24:31 Unfortunately, this has already played out with the Lost Generation and the Greatest Generation. They were separate wars but many argue the world wars are the same bad blood for a reason.
The lost generation males be like: **vanishes out of existence** Fun fact, during the Victorian age, all the way to post WW2 the UK had a big female surplus, it was so bad, that 25% to 30% of women where single, Many males instead of marrying, they became colonial workers, and some of them soldiers in garrisons, some immigrated and even married local women, thus causing a big female surplus, Imagine being a women in first half of XX century in Britain, It was probably like: no himbos 😢?
@@aspen1606 USA rarely had a female surplus problem, since most immigrants are male, Probably there was a female surplus during the reconstruction era in the southern united states, but i don't think USA had any substantially deadly enough events to cause a longstanding female surplus, Nowadays despite women being majority in USA population, males are actually majority in ages 0-42
Also I'm actually surprised he actually predicts China opening up like 5 fronts which is just fkn silly man, China would most likely focus on the pacific and China would focus more defensively on all other fronts.
He was listing potential catalysts for China going to war not that they’d work their way down a list, if they invade Taiwan they obviously wouldn’t fuck with India etc
@@trentn1127 India is actually neutral, and slightly Russia leaning. For india, they get most of their fertiliser and military equipment from Russia, should they get into a war with china, russia can just veto the whole thing by refusing to provide arms.
What’s really scary is it’s entirely possible for an EMP attack which would black out the affected area. Because of this, the citizens would have NO IDEA of what’s really going on with no internet, TV, or comms. Most don’t think of this
@@driffbro3380 Hollywood exaggerates them by showing all tech that uses electricity shutting down. Older cars, shielded electronics, and anything that doesn’t use a computer chip will still work as EMPs damage computer chips.
The sith triumverate still purged the jedi order because fighting amongst themselves. The steel and tripartite pact were also really just held together by the threat of soviet or western intervention.
I think that the influence of the Mongol empire on the red alliance is definitely real, though I would think it has more to do with the fact that the Mongols spread and set up centralized systems everywhere they conquered thannthe treatment of Women. I think another commonality is that most of the areas conquered by the Mongols were conquered because they were accessible by land armies. Most of the democratic nations, in turn tend to be the inverse, they are areas that are accessible by sea power and were thus most influenced by Britain and the United States, as well as being more oriented to the current world order that is glued together by maritime trade. In other words, I would argue that the geographical realities of being oriented toward sea-power, or land-power is the primary factor influencing which side nations are on.
To support this, I think that the nations that are able to be influenced by both sea or land power are consequently the nations that uave the most conflict or switch sides the most. Specific examples would be Vietnam, which has had civil wars and has generally changed sides between Russia's land based coalition, and NATO since WW2. This is because Vietnam is very vulnerable both to land and Sea influence. Another example is Korea, who is a peninsula with the land facing side literally being a vassal state of China, and the South being thoroughly intertwined with NATO. I think youc old use India as an example as well. Generally India has actually been Sea-influence oriented, because the Himalayas are so impossible that land invasions have almost always failed against India, but in the age of modern airpower the balance has shifted somewhat and I think this is part of why you don't see India brazenly challenging Russia or its Allies.
Or maybe communism, and the end of colonialism, specifically in the cold war lead to it. The USSR, or China had close relationships with all those countries that were formed due to anti European and american sentiment. These relationships are the continuation of those, and not anything to do with the mongol empire.
I'll believe WW3 happens when I actually see it happen. We've gone more than 80 years since the end of the second world war, and all that I've seen over that period of time is the presence of nuclear weapons basically SUPPRESSING aggressive campaigns between major world powers, like the kinds that defined the first two world wars. We've had a multitude of wars since 1945, and none of them have been between two countries that were both, at the time, ranked in the Top Ten, militarily. One or the other has been (especially the dozen or so involving the United States), but never have both opponents stood on a level playing field. Don't believe me? Just look at Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, and some of the other "major" conflicts in the past 80 years. Not exactly "meat grinders," if you ask me. So forgive me if I'm a little skeptical when others say that WW3 is inevitable. It is not. No country's government will admit this, but NUCLEAR WEAPONS SCARE EVERYONE! And no one wants to be responsible for the theoretical end of mankind (not even someone as crazy as Vladimir Putin, otherwise he'd have launched at least one tactical nuke at Ukraine by now).
Nuclear war doesn't mean the end of mankind. It could mean the end of number of cities but it's not like when the Russia is attacked by nukes it will start carpet bombing every continent with ICBMs. It will target major cities in the US and Europe and that it. The West will do the same with Russia and China and others. Hundreds of millions of people would die and humanity would be pushed back by 100 years but it's silly to say that it would be over.
No offense but you need to find someone you trust that just specializes in modern military matters, there’s some stuff I noticed that was wrong here from a just casual viewing and a specialized expert would really bring a lot to the analysis
Very true, i like his videos usually amd I agree with a lot. But, he often doesn't properly argument or cite his opinions. A huge flaw in this video is assuming total incompetence in China based on the last year, instead of basing that on a larger time period. A totally opposite thing is assuming that South Korea would be able to defend themselves from China and North Korea, just because they did so in pre-modern times.
@@nikolavideomaker not very reliable to use the competence of a military as an arguing point if they haven't been in a big conflict recently. russia is fighting ukraine and have been incompetent, but china and south Korea haven't been in a large conflict recently. just because they look incompetent doesn't mean they will be incompetent when the bullets start flying, and vice versa
@@Sempapax because I am not a military historian or any other subject matter expert I think it would be better if I didn’t just type out some long text wall, instead I’ll plug in the channel Jimmy Thomist he has offered some really good unbiased analysis about the Ukraine war, also sorry for the late reply
Hello, Whatifalthist. I've been a fan of yours since last year, but my little had been a fan for longer. He and I discovered you separately, one day we were talking and I mentioned you, and was pleasantly surprised when he already knew who you were. In fact he was such a big fan that he would save your videos for special occasions so as not to run out of content from you. I bring all this up because a few weeks ago he killed himself to escape his chronic pain. I just wanted to thank you for giving us more stuff to talk about during what would turn out to be our last few months together.
@@eatinsomtin9984 - Hey, wtf? Ignoring whether this is the “fact” you assert, why say this here? Just looking for attention or a fight? Because to me, saying something like this is what happens when you have no class.
Shame... im sorry for your loss. It does say something when men go to channels like these, Men as a whole are suffering in silence and we know its pointless to talk about anything with being seen as tools and nothing more then his ability to work. Things just looks bleaker and bleaker
17:12 I think I’ve missed this in your old prediction. However, as a guy from Thailand I would definitely ageee with your new decision and say I don’t think this is possible. First many people don’t realized how laughably weak Laos and Cambodia is compared to Vietnam. The Vietnamese has one of the strongest military history and most nationalistic populations with a recently booming economy and trying to be an American ally. On the otehr hand Cambodia and Laos are barely functioning states with Cambodian government recently declaring themselves emperors and Laotian people being mountainous and having large zomia decends not really caring that much about what the government say and won’t be hyper nationalistic. Their economic is laughably poor and laos population is nearly nonexistent compared to Vietnam. In your map Thailand fall to Chinese influence which I would say that it’s as a Thai person, even with Chinese heritage and a pro Chinese father side, Thai people across the political spectrum don’t like the Chinese very much and with Thai national identity forming around prolonged independence from the Europeans and is actually an anti communist American ally during the Cold War, people here have a strong identity around indepence and would immediatly go agaisnt China if it ever slowly conquers Laos. Cambodia is pretty weak and unstable but the population is extremely nationalistic, if anyone have come across internet Cambodians you will know that. thus I don’t think a full slow Chinese takeover will be allowed and just like in much of Africa there will be a native protest agaisnt Chinese incursion . It now just depends on whether America will support Thailand with most of the population being anti Chinese especially the new left but also the old left and the right aren’t very keen on it either. If China can keep the coups and the country break into civil war due to the return of Thaksin or if America support thaksin China will win but if America put even the smallest support for Thailand it will definitely side with Vietnam and squeeze Laos and Cambodia out of existence. The only possible real war would be if China only use these two country as passing ground like Russia and Belarus but with it being so mountainous I don’t think that’s possible. I agree that vietnam will defeat Laos and Cambodia but if America support it or If thai society can get itself together they will definitely join in with vietnam and crush Cambodia and Laos. However I don’t know what Myanmar will do since the coup might support China and could declare a two front on Thailand but also it’s not really that coherent and the millitary technology is pretty backward.
It’s gonna be fucking wild seeing the descendants of the Vietcong, the Imperial Japanese Military, and the US military all working together to fight the same enemy. Imagine telling someone in 1942 that in 80 years, America and Japan would be fighting together as allies. Imagine telling someone in the 1968 the same thing with Communist Vietnamese and American forces.
@@onlyfacts4999 unlike common belief it’s more complicated But long story short, they didn’t surrender, at leats to the Thai government they thought they are allying with Japan It’s a complicated situation so let me explain It started with general p(plaek phibunsongkram) when he take power. He was a strong nationalistic right winged authoritarian leader, not exactly facist but pretty similar. He was trying to take back Cambodia and Laos with some even claiming he has a plan of “greater Thailand” but idk how true it is. He install large authoritarian cultural reform movement making many old cultural aspects illegal and creating nationalist norms for Thai people making stuff like standing in front of the national anthem every morning and evening legally required. Additionally, along with him being a general he knows Thailand couldn’t really resist the sheer Japanese strength so he allied and allow them to go pass Thailand since their goal is to attack Myanmar. Afaik the Japanese also tell general p they will help him get parts of Cambodia and Laos and if they won the entirety of it will be given to Thailand under the Asian co prosperity sphere so he falls for it. However, this does not reflect the thai population at all with large numbers of people already hating general p from his questionable rise to power and many dislike Japanese rule. However, the general Thai people prioritizing peace and harmony doesn’t really want to rebel at first so you don’t see massive anti Japanese movements alone and they know they would lose anyway. However, later in the war, the Japanese started losing grounds and with back up from the Americans the free Thai movement rebel and overthrow general p. They then, with American backing, say that the alliance was “unofficial” and the country have stayed “technically neutral” with the alliance being jsut th decision or general p alone which most people don’t agree with and he just do bc he know he won’t win anyway. This is also to keep the country from paying war reparations from being in the axis. Thailand have always been amazing at diplomacy so it’s not surprising to me they pull this off. I don’t think the same thing will happen with the Chinese. It’s not as unwinnably strong as the Japanese.Japan have defeated multiple strong nations inside and outside south east Asia like Vietnam and China and general p have a similar ideology. None of that exist in Thailand today and If China pour in a small number of troops struggling over the mountains of Laos they will be resisted. Japan also target the city of Bangkok as well with its navy which is extremely important due to how centralize Thailand is so China fighting in the north east will likely be resisted and it will be a long while before they take enough of the country to surrender. There’s a large leftist ideology in the north east so maybe China can pull on that but I doubt they will fall for it. With so much Thai identity being around liberty from foreign powers I doubt they will give up to the Chinese This also depends on th action of ofc, asean and the Americans. ASEAN isn’t that strong but it does influence how south East Asian nation respond. currently they are anti Chinese with the problems in the South China Sea, especially from Indonesia. From what I’ve heard from my Indonesian friend on the internet they are extremely anti Chinese with even anti Chinese racism rising among young generation,something expected for a nation with a rough history agaisnt its Chinese minority. it’s too wrapped up in its own problem to fight China tho but it could still influence asean decision if it doesn’t break first.
@@Kaiserboo1871 yeah fr I wish American boomer led education stop forcing the Vietnam war with Vietnam as American enemy down the kids throat tbh, many places in south east Asia are very pro America especially Vietnam
Most Chinese Allies in south east Asia are dysfunctional state like Laos Cambodia Myanmar and Brunei while stronger powers like Vietnam Thailand Indonesia Malaysia and Philippines are pro America.idk where Singapore lie exactly tho but they are just rich. As a city state they wont have the manpower to wage aggressive wars. China often side with the more authoritarian and hated side of society like the coup in Thailand and Myanmar and the absolute monarch of Brunei. Thus, the more dysfunctional the country the easier it is to fall to China. If it can keep itself together it will be with America. Unless anti Chinese racism start rising in other parts of south east Asia which seems to be on the way in many places I hope it wont be as strong here, bc I’m ethnically more than half Chinese
Regarding the potential PLA amphibious invasion of Taiwan. Remember that during WW2 when the US Navy/Marines had perfected amphibious operations, they decided not to invade Formosa because it would have been too difficult. They instead skipped it and landed at Okinawa.
taiwan could be besieged and starved out quite easily the island produces no oil and only 1/3 of its food. The mainland can effectively send the island back to the stone age in the first couple of hours by hitting its power plants and infrastructure hubs.
@@hughmungus2760 but does the PLAN have that capability? While in sheer tonnage it might be the largest fleet in the world, tonnage is not the same as combat capability. Much of it is coastal and riverine ships (Brown Water Navy) as opposed to seagoing, and IIRC the PLAN is still lacking in terms of training. The Taiwanese have (I might be wrong here) similar anti-ship capabilities, and so long as they keep their eastern coast safe from interdiction, they can be resupplied. And while land-based anti-ship missiles are not perfect, the logistics of operating on the other side of the island, subject to fire, and likely bearing the brunt of any initial response by a third party, means that the eastern coast of Taiwan will be very hard to blockade. Realistically, all the Taiwanese need to do is holding on for the first two weeks or so, while the US decides to show up. at best, any fight between the USN and PLAN will be like Jutland, at worst, the largest vessels of the Chinese Fleet will play a modern day Bismarck. Even the Japanese Fleet could seriously disrupt any attempt of the Chinese to starve Taiwan into submission, and it's not unlikely that the Japanese would also get involved.
@@delgado.adrian160 Taiwan is less than 100 miles off the chinese coast. A 'brown water navy' is more than enough to keep the entire island blocked off. The US realistically can't lift the blockade of taiwan without striking the chinese mainland as chinese land based bombers carrying air launched antiship missiles can make short work of any ship attempting to run the blockade. Then you have land based rocket artillery that will blow up any ship docking in taiwan. the entire island is going to be a giant shooting gallery. The US will essentially have to escalate to full scale bombardment of the chinese mainland to suppress airfields (including ones deep inland for the strategic bombers) and rocket batteries to even have a hope of keeping supply lines open to taiwan. which is pretty much escalating to a hairs breadth of nuclear war. Even then, the chinese can make it nightmarishly difficult using submarine launched naval mines which will take hours to deploy and months to clear In reality, the US navy wouldn't go within 1000miles of the chinese coast because the moment they pop up on chinese radars, 100 antiship missiles get fired at them from the coastline.
@@hughmungus2760 Anti-Ship missiles are a bit more complex than an Anti-Air system, especially if you need to aim at a moving target, in the middle of the ocean, 1000 miles away. Having them is not an "I win" button. Nor do they guarantee that any country could eliminate any other country's fleet before reaching their target. The US won't even need to get directly involved. Simply turning the Taiwan Strait into a warzone will kill shipping into China's main ports (which means that China loses the fuel it needs to keep the lights on, let alone fight a war). The US fleet has options besides showing up in the Taiwan Strait, such as blocking Chinese traffic or China-bound traffic through Malacca (again, killing their oil imports). Especially if China is trying to blockade Taiwan into submission instead of outright invading. It then becomes a matter of whether Taiwan breaks first, or Mainland China. If there are actual combat operations, the US fleet, while smaller in overall tonnage has more capable combat vessels, especially operating in open water, and enough of a fighter screen to deter or inflict heavy casualties on Chinese land-based bombers And again, IF, as you said earlier, China is simply starving Taiwan into submission, they won't count with land-based weapons on Taiwan's eastern shore, which is also at the end of their realistic operative range.
@@delgado.adrian160 ships are alot bigger and slower than planes, and the ocean doesn't have alot of terrain cover so no. Antiship missiles are alot easier to aim. If anything the US attempting to fire back at land based launchers are going to struggle because the vast majority of them are mobile and well hidden. Finding and tracking US fleets off the coast of china won't be hard. China has no shortage of space based recon assets and over the horizon radars. As well as recon aircraft and drones. The only hope the US has is to stay well out of range of the majority of chinese missiles and hope the few that do get fired can be intercepted or aren't as accurate as they're advertised to be. Aka. Hope and pray. For the US to get into the taiwan straits with surface vessels, That is basically impossible. If anyone is going to have a jutland moment its the US foolhardily sailing into a swarm of chinese antiship missiles thinking its still the 90s Theres an off chance the US might get a sub or two into the straits but its unlikely they will survive when outnumbered 10:1 by chinese diesel electric subs lying in ambush Taiwan's resources will run out Much faster than the mainland because the mainland at least still produces about 1/3 of the fuel it consumes. With adequate stockpiles, rationing and pipelines to Russia, china could stretch that out for years Taiwan produces no fuel and the few fuel storage locations it has will likely be blown up early on. You can blockade the malacca straits for a while but you choke off the flow of oil to all of asia and countries like Japan and south korea will likely buckle before china does forcing you to lift the blockade eventually. especially if taiwan has already fallen and you're effectively hurting everyone friend or foe for a lost cause. Chinese bombers all have standoff weapons that outrange US destroyers. they can lob these at any US fleet from well out of their engagement range and fly back to do it again in 12 hours. Each chinese bomber can carry upto 6 supersonic antiship missiles or 2-4 hypersonic ones. And china has over 200 bombers. This is on top of the vast numbers of land based missiles and ship based missiles which range from subsonic sea skimmers to hypersonic glide weapons. Chinese land based missiles can reach the western shore of taiwan too. taiwan isn't very big.
Except he's still working off faulty backwards logic &twisted info so he'll forever be behind the 8ball.. I just hope to god the analyst's in SADboi division are better than he is because he analysis is atrocious, damn near fox news level bad
This video is "all western propaganda delusion 100% speedrun". Idiots like these have been predicting "rapid collapse of China" since the Mid 70's and reality is completely opposite. How about a little dose of truth in seeing how US banks collapsing now are comparable to 2008 levels and how US is into a recession? Such "strong institutions"
He biggest thing is also the fact that prepping a sea invasion would be really easy to spot on satellites meaning Taiwan has months to react to an assault
@@dansmith1661 I've always wondered why China didn't just do exactly this; if they weren't so aggressive they could've tried a honeypot scheme for integration & it might've worked + U.S. wouldn't have been able to interfere so easily
while i do agree nukes could easily be off the table for China and West, however, Pakistan will use nukes in this scenario if India goes offensive. they do not have the discipline to restrain the use of nukes and they will be desperate enough with existential threat to use them. I do wonder if India will get involved at all to be honest. India is a very shrewd country and probably the best geopolitical player in the world and believe they would thrive in post-WWIII world.
i do also think there will be opportunistic countries in the middle east, africa (Ethiopia comes to mind) that know they can initiate a war with neighbours with little to no international players intervening. This is why i do think a "world war" is likely versus regional east asia one.
@@shettlock In a sense, yes. But in the grand scheme of things, I don't put much stock in Africa as a region because they're pretty much always at war, lol.
I think the reason China didn't invade Taiwn is, well they are afraid, they probably wanted to see outcome of UA ru war since they have similarities, arguably ru was in BETTER position to win then China was against Taiwn... And they failed, and if Spring/Summer is successful for UA, then yeah. Considering China trying the diplomatic game(uniting Saudis and Iran and trying to negotiate Pakistan Israel relationship) maybe they're looking for a way out? Or biting their time for more favourable environment.
Happy 500k, Rudyard! I absolutely love your videos and you are my spiritual leader. EDIT: Guys I didn't mean it literally, I meant he's like a mentor to me.
He's a great candidate for "Spirit Animal." This dude is brutally sophisticated for one so young. He's interested in all the same things I am. I'm a decade older, I have life-long friends, friendly acquaintances... nobody likes to talk about this stuff except for people like us who congregate around content like this.
As an Indian I would like to say that all the recent politics have been highly influenced by the inflation and concerns regarding oil/gas security(as Russia offered it for cheap price). And also the current Modi government hates Biden administration, because of it's interference in the internal politics of our country and support for Pakistan. I think Biden want to weaken the right wing governments of other countries. But even with all these thing if there's any threat to national security they India would most likely ally with US but it's completely *Neutral* for now.
@@nitinmeena8416 As an indian I would never want to ally with the West or anything of the sort. West is incredibly exploitative and doesn't have a good track record in any place they get heavily involved (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc)
@@WastedBananas what will we do in a two front war? Or a three front war? Russia is our ally but they are allies of china too. I don't think they will come to help us.
he has no credentials, very unreasonal amount of conclusions based on very little data, track-record of doing bad predictions, fearmongering and US propaganda.
He litterally just made a random blob to mark taliban territory on a map, and didnt include cuba, north korea, or Nicaragua as russian aligned states He also said drones made no impact on warfare, and even says it didnt change anything in Ukraine. Its just factually wrong in everyway. If they made no difference you wouldnt see both sides scrambling to get them I cant even finish a comment without him saying something terribly wrong. China isnt reverting to maoism, its just becoming more authoritarian and nationalist. Their military industrial complex also isnt as bad as americas like he says. In america the goverment supports the companies forming monopolies, and allows them to increase prices sometimes 9 fold over a decade for no reason, while giving millions in campaign funds to politicians. In china neither happens. Chinas military production is often state owned, or has to operate within a reasonable profit margin, and cannot donate in elections. They by definition do not have a military industrial complex, as their military capacity is dominated by the goverment, not corporations. You may as well just call it a military complex instead, cause industry isnt as important Thats all im gonna say. He just wont stop spouting this nonsense
I really wanna know why every map I see if ww3 has India on the side of America when India's greatest historical ally is Russia, if anything I could see them being neutral.
India wouldn’t be subject to the interests of the US or Russia, as seen by their exploitation of Russia while russia is vulnerable, so they couldn’t really sway India. What we do know about India is that they are in fierce opposition to china in any way possible. This will lead them to make a strategic alliance with the western bloc against China to pursue their own national interests, similar to vietnam.
I've always seen India as an oportunist. They'll jump to the side that is winning. Similar to Italy in WW1. They were part of the Central Powers on paper, but joined the Entante in '15.
India is alied with america against china. They only get put against russia when idiots like whatifalthist decide russia and china are allies in the third world war
Harder to compare wars than may initially appear, & thus predictions are easily skewed. Remember the so-called Second Hundred Years War, a series of global, regional, & local wars & revolutions lasting from ~1688 to 1815. It included the characteristics you described distinguishing the Thirty Years War from the World Wars as well as those unique to WW2. Also, a number of historians consider World Wars 1 & 2 one long war. Each WW1 & 2 were preceded by waves of border wars, civil wars, & revolutions, and followed by such. Some historians even lump the Cold War in to an extended war circa 1914-1991. Thing is fighting tends to keep going even after the main war stops. Fanatical Nazis kept fighting - on a small, terroristic scale - in Occupied Germany into 1948, Ukrainians fought Stalinist Soviets well into the 1950s, and on & on. I do find it hard to believe nuclear weapons won’t be used by a side losing badly on conventional battlefields. But perhaps you’re right - the planet devolves into a static conventional global war a la George Orwell’s “1984” that sustains itself by not going nuclear but instead grinds on forever & ever like some of those fictional wars in Star Trek dramas.
It should be mentioned, that most of the modern satellite network was an order of magnitude more expensive to put up in the first place than it would be to replace now. We can reuse rocket hardware (not the fuel, which is the cheap part) a dozen times now for launching things like satellites. And, which modern tech, a several ton satellite can be replaced with one of a a few dozen launched in a cluster now. Even the space debris cause by such warfare would last a very short time, maybe years at most, before mostly reentering the atmosphere. I don't think the capacity to cripple economies by going after satellites exists to the extent you express, as of this decade. Not even just doing a fanboy thing over Space-X, we've just demonstrated that getting things can be much cheaper, and be done in greater numbers for the same volume, so the societal investment is not nearly as much.
Not sure if the USN would want to operate directly between Taiwan and China during a conflict. Being that close would provide minimal warning for ASM strikes and it's fairly shallow IIRC which might make sub operations problematic.
4:49 As a Pakistani student of Economics, my professors told me that laws of economics doesn't apply to Pakistan. That's strange Pakistan is! So don't be surprised. 😅
There was a joke in family guy where Peter said that he can't wait for WW5 and when his wife asked him why he called it WW5 he said that it would be worse than both WW1 and WW2 combined. 😂
There was a financial crash. We have a Madoff=SBF, a Lehman Brothers in SVB. Instead of tanking down, a $450k mortgage went from $2k payments to $3k payments. 3% to 7% doesn’t sound bad until you realize it’s a 130% increase in the cost of money.
After WW1: maybe we shouldn't do alliances. _creates the League of Nations._ After WW2: maybe we shouldn't do alliances. _creates United Nations and NATO_ After WW3: maybe we shouldn't do alliances...
2:20 As someone who is married to and knows many Kazakhs and other central Asians, I can faithfully say that most people in that region genuinely hate the Chinese. And as of recently have a strong distaste for Russia
considering how they are surrounded by both, they either won't make a difference in such a war. Or one of the 2 powers won't give them the choice. Like how Canada will be forced into whatever the US wants if it goes that far.
@@avroarchitect1793 honestly it's not really proximity that is the problem for central Asia....it's the fact that the regions main economy is based on being the middle man of Trade With Thier two biggest contributers collapsing, they too will suffer
@@purple.requiem Honestly I have been saying for Years that America needs to stop assisting Europe so much and focus more on South America and Central Asia. Though unfortunately most Americans have no Idea Kazakhstan is even a country let alone where it is, and those who do only know it from Borat. On top of that the blatantly corrupt culture in the post Soviet World makes it impossible to support such an effort. Honestly if Kazakhs could come together to reduce the amount of corruption there, more Western powers would be willing to invest in the country
@@myname-pe2pe we already have lower corruption ever since the a$$hole dictator stepped down in 2019. And our new president is trying to be independent. He has distanced Kazakhstan away from Russia. Kazakhstan even accepted men who fleed mobilization conscription into the country. Problem is America is so focused on a few countries and doesn't provide an economic partner alternative to many developing nations such as Kazakhstan or Belize or Bangladesh. America is so sloppy at these kinds of things and it needs to stop because countries have no choice but to partner with evil China. And America wonders, "why did China get so powerful".
China’s moves recently have only confused me. I personally struggle to see a scenario where China starts a war with the US and comes out on top, especially considering the Chinese economy is actually looking significantly more fragile than initially predicted. Yet, they keep on putting pressure on Taiwan like they’re ready to invade before just not invading. This makes me think that the Chinese themselves don’t believe they can win the war. Not to mention, like you said about a revolution, if they start a war this could spike unrest in the country and quickly have a civil war, or at least extreme internal troubles, on their hands.
As a Chinese person, I think China is in a much better position than the United States. Prices are stable and supplies are plentiful. At least there are no mass robberies in China. ruclips.net/video/72vc0hY2rPQ/видео.html ruclips.net/video/uJiWNCiRH2s/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Vl8QxqTkRzY/видео.html ruclips.net/video/YUMSTp2jfXk/видео.html
Are you sure you understand China? Eastern culture is different from Western culture. If you use Western thinking to speculate on Eastern decisions, do you think you can draw correct conclusions?
It's always been a goal of the CCP to conquer Taiwan, as it is standing prove for Mao's failure. Since Xi is banging the nationalist drum like no one before him since Mao, he has to make the call one day. He's now dictator for life, but it is his number one goal to have the "re"-unification be his legacy (every CCP chairman has to have that one great thing they did). It's not about rationality, look at the whole Corona situation that has lead to protests the likes of which haven't been seen there since the Tiananmen massacre.
@@jayhill2193 That’s a good point, but it also makes me wonder why they keep holding off from launching an actual invasion in that case. If it is indeed a question of when they invade, what are they waiting for? If anything, the longer the Chinese wait the harder it will be to come out victorious.
I take issue with your assessment that India would be an American ally. India is not formally a member of any military alliance and has always adopted a foreign policy opposed to such a notion. This policy of non-alignment has survived since independence, and there is little sign currently that India would abandon it. The issue for India to join a particular side is that it has strong ties with both Russia and America. Russia supplies military equipment to India and has supported India in every conflict it has fought since 1970. So India is unlikely to fight Russia. As for America, they have strong economic ties with India and they also work with them on various security matters. So India won't fight America either. Therefore it is most likely that India would not take a side in any such conflict. It is also wrong to assume that all the countries surrounding India (excluding Pakistan) will support China. Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal are unlikely to go to war with India because they are much weaker militarily and doing so would alienate one of their security and trading partners. And even though these countries have strong economic ties to China, their populations (especially in recent times) have grown more wary of China. Therefore, these countries probably would not get involved and remain neutral in any such conflict.
I agree with you for the early stages of a world conflict; India supports from afar when they feel it's just. In other words, in my very unprofessional opinion, I think Idia would, in one way or another, support whomever they felt was being victimized. Whomever starts a war, usually being viewed as the agreesor. In this scenario, China is the aggressor against Taiwan and Russia is the aggressor against Ukraine. Having said that, India still, refuses to make any public announcement against Russia, but has sent aid to Ukraine. "India has recently dispatched its twelfth consignment of humanitarian aid to Ukraine. This humanitarian aid and assistance is in keeping with the human-centric approach of the Indian Government." If push comes to shove, if there is an actual WW3, Idia, being one of the biggest armies in the world, India would have to choose a side because failing to do so, would still be choosing. For example, if China and Russia were "winning " and Idia did nothing, that would be support of them by non-action and the same if US, Europe, and Asian Pacific were "winning " and India did nothing. In that same light, if one side started gaining an advantage that would result in becoming a dominant superpower, for instance, lets say China is winning and the US economy has failed. Would India be cool with their Chinese NEIGHBORS being the only dominate military force left in the world? ... after their aggressions in Tibet and Taiwan? I think that would be a silly bet to take agaist the future of India's sovereignty. In times like these (early 2023), it's not hard to maintain an intelligent neutrality, but in times of world conflict it can easily become ignorant to hold onto said neutrality. * just for conjecture, I seriously doubt we'll see anything like a WW3 in our lifetime.
@@MarcBrown if you think russia is the aggressor against ukraine, then you dont know what you're talking about. the current war started in 2014 with the maidan coup. Russia only now entered the existing war with the intention of finishing it. Its aim is not to conquer ukraine, but to secure the fate of the russian speaking ukranians. I suggest you don't take western propaganda seriously. It is pathetic to fall for your own propaganda. Also would India go to war with china? Both ancient civilisations which have coexisted for all this time. Why would they fight for the sake of some imperial americans and their cronies. It seems only sensible to maintain good relations because you can't chose your neighbours. USA is on the other side of the world but india and china share a massive border. Whatever repercussions of not supporting usa would be, they'll dwarf against the ones coming from an india-china war. Both countries are well aware that the only people who will benefit from and indo-china war are the west. If the west is going to refuse trade relations due to a reluctance of india choosing a side, then india can adapt. Indians don't like to be talked to in that tone. At the end of the day, the nature of USA has been very clearly revealed in the AUKUS agreement when they snubbed France. Look what the americans did to the German-Russian gas pipeline Nordstream 2. Is that the country India wants to be allied with? Don't be ridiculous. It's like making a deal with the devil. "It is dangerous to be the enemy of america but it is fatal to be its ally."- Henry Kissinger(decorated war criminal).
I feel like these young people you know really over use the term CEO... Mean I guess it's technically correct but traditional CEOs typically have decades of experience in management. Like we had never heard of CEOs under 45 in the 2000s
i dont understand how WIAH expects Pakistan to lose all land till the indus river, which inhabits tens of millions of People, and collapse as a state without using its nuclear weapons....seriously how can u possibly conceive such an scenario?
Yeah Pakistan is one country no one has an interest in seeing collapse, even India. I'm legitimately terrified that if the Pakistani government continues to disintegrate, terrorists will swoop in, seize the nukes, and dirty bombs will start showing up all over the globe. US, Europe, China, India, West Africa, anyone the fundamentalist Muslims have beef with.
“America and communist Vietnam are now strong allies” No, they are not. They are barely allies of convenience, Vietnam has a unique relationship with China and maintains relations with Russia, China and the US, this is one issue I found in this video, of which there are many. I enjoy your content but you speak as though you’re an expert on any of this when it’s clear you only have a surface level of knowledge on anything you talk about. This is dangerous as some people take what you say as gospel and you have a massive platform.
Your right. Vietnam is a "potential" allie. The US is working on tha front. At the moment vietnam is neutral, and will not be happy with chinas expansion. Vietnam did not vote in the un against russia or china in any vote for the last 20 years, but votet against us allies (not against the us)
India-US could do so much more together which would benefit both parties. But as long as US is under Biden not much can improve. US's diplomacy under him is weird. Because of their policies they lost Saudi Arabia as an ally and pushed it towards China, it still supports Pakistan and provides military help to them even though Pak has betrayed US numerous times. By doing this US has earned quite a bad name here in India. It claims it wants to be our ally, even we would like good relations with US but for that it will have to prove itself as a reliable partner first.
Nay, I think this relationship shouldn't change..... We'd be pulled into various unnecessary wars if that happens. Best is that we use their fears of a growing china and build ourselves up as much as possible but in the end of it still be neutral
@@nupnorth Depends. Basically on the amount of affectation of the atmosphere. The northern hemisphere would be far more affected, no doubt (way more so than the Southern one, with the possible exception of China, and the equatorial regions) But a nuclear winter severe enough would render chaos upon crops, worldwide.
First of all, much respect to you for reviewing honestly your past predictions. Now, I don't see why China would ban itself for decades from international relationships as Russia is currently doing. Why would they go to India, korea, etc?! They want to topple the US hegemony, by establishing an alternative market and financial system. Not by being cut off from the rest of the world.
They want to regain Taiwan due to nationalism which can override common sense. They are trying to compete with America though markets and diplomacy and I seriously hope you're right in thinking this is the direction they focus on.
@@Sparrow24847 Xi surely knows Taiwan has never been a part of China and the KMT, who fled to the now PRC, entered Japanese Taiwan, under Western occupation. Faux accounts of history and nationalism can feed justification to act against Taiwan. More likely, China is trying to gain control Taiwan for another reason: Projection of power beyond the First Island Chain.
Something I think miss out.. decision is not made by them. It's made by one. Someone who wants to leave some footprint in the history, and why would u think he will care about normal ppl lives.
@@TakealookX he's soooo far from Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot standards. Yes, Xi is an autocratic maniac, but I think he knows the risks of falling are far greater from the inside than from foreign powers. That's also why China always try to promote a Westphalian approach (every country minds it's own internal policy). Taiwan is viewed by CCP as their backyard, and an existential threat to China's unity. Further than that, there is not much risk.
Well in regards to WW2 tactics we haven't seen the same type of technological advances such as the machine gun or the airplane today ergo the tactics shouldn't change much. Got drones dropping grenades or mortar rounds? Well just have sufficient overhead cover and you should be fine
@@pbmccain that's my point, that sort of technology would change how wars are fought. Right now those don't exist to the best of my knowledge and since the Russians don't have them I'm not surprised that WW2 tactics are being used.
I love these videos, but I wish they'd have more sources. 12:49 is what I'm specifically referring to, there're other examples of such lack of sources but this is the one thus far has really stood out to me. It makes sense given everything else to be true about Chinese bureaucracy, but where are you getting these anecdotes from? Otherwise, love the video thus far.
China always erupts in civil war whenever they get enough power. Hell, they haven't even finished up their current civil war with Taiwan. China has had the most Civil Wars of all nations and its not even close.
@@anasqader3851 that's just propaganda. They can't even get two departments of their government on the same page. They may have ambitions but they just project the image of being these grand geopolitical chess masters. It's all face not substance. Especially now that the war in Ukraine has proven some of their fundamental assumptions wrong.
Check out War Thunder here: playwt.link/whatifalthist
Why are you posting when its almost 1 am for you
Your content is genuinely so helpful in coping with the chaos of the modern world. Helped me become much more of a rationalist and pragmatist on socio/political issues and philosophy. A personal thank you for all the informative work you to to be a voice of reason in a cacophony of doomerism
I still think you are wrong about the pendulum being allowed to swing back and the Right-Wing backlash being able to take place.
The thing is, Socialism is not the real foundation of the Left, it is MALTHUSIAN in nature. This is why the Democrats flipped straight from Slavery to Socialism in the 1800s. Socialism is just a front.
Malthus predicted that the world could never support more than a Billion human beings in the 1700s. It does not matter how many times and how badly this sort of thing is proven wrong; it codifies and legitimizes one of the sickest human weaknesses; Fear of other human beings.
Fear leads to phobia, and to hate. This explains why each and every single policy enacted by the Left htis century has had a negative effect on humanity overall, and why every word coming out of the media is designed to trick everyone on Earth into hating everyone else.
It is leading to madness .... at the point of origin. They do believe their own hype, which is why the Left is becoming more and more irrational at an ever increasing rate. IMHO, this could lead the Left (who indeed are the establishment) to use WMDs against the American people. Yes, the Far left is insane and evil, but they are also not even close to being as clever as they think they are. Thus, they might believe that they can nuke just parts of the country and their favored places will still be fine. This would be FAR from the worst abuse of data in recent years...... and General Flintstone (miley) has already proven to be more loyal to the CCP than to the office of the Presidency.
I really hope you are more right than I am about all that, but it becomes less of a hope every day. In any case, folks your age are headed for interesting times.
Xi is also headed backwards, as you said, but he is verifiably ready to slaughter ANY number of his own people to maintain power. Are his cronies here really all that different?
In any case, it is a fact that no member of the CCP has any interest in the continued existence of anyone that is not both Chinese and a Communist.
Period.
OK a quick note on why Ukraine looks more like WW2 and WW1 than Desert Storm. Its Air Superiority. Or rather the lack thereof. Modern Maneuvre warfare relies on one faction having control of the skies. Ukraine is a stalemate of contested airspace over the entire front line. Neither side can fly along the front let alone take control at the moment. Thus pinning both forces in place and causing a reversion to WW2 and WW1 doctrine.
Pakistan doesn't have a Civil War *Because* they are 64% first cousin Marriages according to the World Health 0rg. This was a stat around 2014ish .
They won't fight their Family, everybody is a Hillbilly out there.
It's funny How the First World War was once regarded as the "War to End All Wars" but the grim truth is no matter how terrible the last great war was, it only set the stage for the next one.
Conflict between humans is inevitable, we don't want it any other way.
Because people forget how terrible the last one was. Usually when the generation that fought it dies off.
@@steven3837 not true even after the 2nd WW for example wars still happend its just that with nuclear weapons The Great Powers could no longer directly fight each other. Can't fight directly? Then proxy wars, regime change or wars with weaker and non nuclear armed nations became the next best thing. Even minor powers went to war with one another. And many of those wars had WW2 Vets. WW2 after all was Full of WW1 Vets.
That moniker was never meant in that people actually thought it would be the last war ever fought.
It was in relation to how big it was.
We still haven't done "The War That Ends Warfare". The idea has long been that if we made wars terrible enough, no one would fight them.
And the "Long Peace" is proof, no one yet has the desire to just blow literally everything up.
If WW3 did break out people would probably be making memes about it for the first few days
For the first few days ? we'd make memes during the whole thing ..just look at Ukrainians
All the pieces are on the board, we're only a few steps away
I am all for it.
@@bon3scrush3r ww3 would make the russo-ukrainian war look like child’s play
Man! I am 19 I am worried I would be conscripted.
There was a joke going around in the mid-1980s about Reagan & Gorbachev. After both had died and gone to heaven they would meet for lunch once a week. One day Gorbachev looks over his side of the cloud and says, "Well, it looks like your stock market is down another thousand points today." Reagan looks over his side of the cloud and says, "Yes, you're right. It also looks like there is renewed fighting on the German/Chinese border."
German-Chinese border???
@@clouds-rb9xt germans took over ussr -> german chinese border
I'm guessing that's the joke?
😂
German Chinese border? WTH?
@@clouds-rb9xt German-Chinese border is part of the joke. One or both got so big, they became neighbors. Just to clarify!
When I lived in china between 2016-2017 I knew an paratrooper officer in the PLA. He had never jumped out of a plane, paid off his commanding officer so he didn’t have to attend and his whole unit were involved in the smuggling of hashish.
I can confirm the hash smuggling part, China is a big crazy chaotic mess and will probably always be
Wow! Is the PLA a broken structure built on nepotism?
Everything is possible.
In the USA you can become an admiral in a landlocked state.
You can become a general without any education or experience, but only because you are of the right race and sexual orientation.
There are a lot of strange things in the world, so you can believe in a paratrooper without jumping.
That rules
Sounds like my kinda fella
3:24 "There's no one in the American alliance structure who looks like they want to declare war on anyone else in it" With the possible exceptions of Turkey and Greece
Those two have been wanting to declare war on eachother for centuries.
At this point I'm pretty sure it's all posturing since no one wins
Turkey has bigger fish to fry, namely Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict and the Kurdish problem.
Turkey really can’t afford a war with Greece at the moment.
@@Kaiserboo1871 And Greece can't afford a war with Turkey, considering that it has 1/8th the population (one which is declining rapidly, as most of Europe is).
Greek and turks keep a eye on each other. But Turkey has to keep a eye within after 2016 and on the borders after 2020
Lol Turkey ultimate goal is to recreate the later ottoman empire, so Greece is in their list, but it is in the bottom of that list they still need to beat out Iran ,saudi, Egypt , and Israel in the middle east before they can turn on the Greece
Whatifaltist underestimates how much better governments have gotten at preventing rebellion. Chinese rebellion in five years? Everyone thought Iran would have collapsed, but it didn't.
You do have a point, but this is also peacetime.
A world war would put a lot of pressure on these countries.
Rebellions aren't as common today not just because governments got better at preventing them and historically any rebellion can be prevented as long as the population is getting their 3 meals a day. It's also because in the modern day people want to prevent the suffering and bloodshed that comes with rebellion and subsequent civil war.
A war may actually be a uniting force in countries like Russia and China.
Where there’s famine there’s revolution. Full stomachs don’t rebel
Iran's suffered multiple rebellions and has mostly sustained itself through a mixture of censorship and raw brutality, as well as lack of will by many others to support the rebels. The CCP has thousands of protests every single day but because nobody wants to poke the Dragon on its home turf too hard and the Great Firewall we don't hear as much about it. I'm not saying governments won't prevent rebellions, but just that it is a possibility.
An alliance built around a common enemy, only survives as long as the enemy. A great deal of diplomacy that's happened in my lifetime, domestic or foreign, has revolved around preseving traditional enemies.
That's why NATO was being questioned from around 1991 to 2022. Some people in the 90's even questioned the purpose of the US now that it had won.
The fact remains Nato is more of a energy cartel that does military drills than a cohesive alliance since the threat doesn’t exist. It died 30 years ago. Russia is not interested in “conquering Europe” and neither is China even if they had the means there’s no short term benefit other than keeping Europe out of their internal and regional affairs to merit the expense.
As things stand in practice NATO members act in conflicts around the world knowing that as long as the pact exists and the USA foots the bill there’s no threat of repercussions other than the occasional terrorist attack or wave of terrorist attacks which is a pill most MEPs can swallow before going to bed at night.
With the exception of Russia there’s kinda no scenario were they don’t push the button before allowing NATO to partion them or if the conditions become such that it becomes unable to keep the reduced regional power capacity it holds today
Germany after World War II probably being the best example of that.
It's strong enough to wipe out America, America is a country that killed itself lol
@@GAndreC
>Russia is not interested in exanding their domain anymore
>Russia invades Ukraine
>Putin says Ukraine is a fake nation that belongs to Russia
"World wars are a demographic ejaculation" 💀
China: *invades Vietnam*
Vietnam: How many times do we have to teach you this lesson old man?!
It should be Korea, the only country China love to invade more then vietnam is korea.
Any Country: invades Vietnam
Vietnam: Ah, shit, here we go again...
China took land after the war but later gave land back to Vietnam to normalize ties
Don't forget for more than 1000 years, there was no Vietnam. It was part of China.
Tbh, *NOBODY* wants smoke with Vietnam, lol.😂
Though China vs Vietnam is like Russia vs Finland, i.e. doesn't/didn't go very well for the "superior" country, hahaha!😅
unless you are a survivalist, no one actually wins.
Would you want to?
Agreed, and if your merchant will martial or priest backing.
@@ray495903314 I’d love to and I’d love to make sure my family does as well. At least after the war we can build a nation with the values it once had not these disgusting values of modernity
Nah, nukes won’t be used. The only one who is willing to use total war tactics is Putin and he’s actually far more incompetent than people think as we’ve seen in Ukraine.
Majority of people would survive no survivalist needed
Drones really have been a game changer in Ukraine, its almost impossible to conduct any troop movement without the other side knowing about it, they help guide artilery and missles with pinpoint precision, and the Iranian kamikaze Drone and civilian drones armed with small explosives have proven effective and extremely cost efficient weapons
But if short-range advanced camera-linked waepons such linked to cost-effective measures such as laser-weaponry, which the US are researching, turn out to be effective, there might be a viable counter-strategy that neither Russia or Ukraine is deploying atm.
Yeah, the amount of drone footage of both sides that keeps being pumped out really says alot..
@@emilsohn1671 lasers are extremely specialised weapons systems that have at best a few km of range. You would need massive numbers of them to provide any real protection on the strategic level and they are more or less useless against anything other than drones meaning they'd be a logistical liability.
Drones have certainly been effective for both sides and are definitely a change in war, but let's not pretend the whole war has been determined by these drones.
@@graye2799 But this is also a war between 2 relatively low-tech parties, Ukraine has received still relatively small amounts of modern western gear.
7:09💀 he predicted that a lil too well
"World wars are demographic ejaculations." What a pick-up line!
we should really make telling people not to have kids an executable offense
@@adolfchadermien Most mild right-winger
@@pretendtheresaname9213 funniest part is i thought it would be ironic to name my account this despite me being totally on board with "great replacement" like if foreigners whom want kids are coming here let them all come but yeah i have an "any means necessary" on fixing birth rates
@@adolfchadermien When it comes to diverse countries that's a no-brainer, specially if they assimilate right off the bat as they do in the US. For homogeneous countries that's a social, cultural collapse.
You can allow immigration from close, more similar countries I suppose - say Japan is ok with Korean and Taiwanese immigration (doubt they would want a chinese population) or how Ukrainians have integrated easily in other Eastern-Central European countries - but even that eventually stops. It doesn't take long for immigrants who assimilate to have similar birth rate to their new country. It's a band-aid and the same issue will rise again.
@@pretendtheresaname9213 yeah with the US my view is more people, my view of homogeneous countries is adapt or die... they are going to have to change if they are wanting to survive new trends and the east asian system is broken due to caring about boomers more than the young. With Taiwanese its less about chinese population and more about the ccp ideas if people want to live in Taiwan they probably dont have the ccp ideas. Honestly something needs to be done to sort of assimilate native citizens towards where immigrants are if it sounds weird because it just seems immigrants have more of a work ethic, more trad values and work harder then the people already here...how can we make our own citizens more like the legal and screw it illegal immigrants
The was in Ukraine is more like WW1 than WW2 arguably. Confused open terrain movements, shifting to defensive lines that devolves into trench warfare. Where the trenches meet settlements they become Verdun like. It's a war of attrition where airpower doesn't make or break actions but artillery does. Infantry attacks are usually small unit probes trying to infiltrate static defense lines
I agree but air power will make a difference once they eliminate Ukraines soviet Era air defence systems fully. They are still very effective but as the Russians target them more and more they are now becoming able to use glide bombs launched from aircraft and it is devastating.
@@HANUMAN7454 yeah we need to find a way to renforce their air defence fast!
Edit: and also give them more modern aircraft
@@sonneh86
When I hear that Russia is the main exporter of fertilizer in the world, what I internalize is that they've been the largest exporter of explosives for that same amount of time. It doesn't matter what aircraft you send, no one has the bombs to drop in the West. The infrastructure to process massive amounts of Tri-nitro-toluene and other compounds simply doesn't exist, and at least for the US our rail lines have become notoriously dangerous within the past 6 months. Send jets all you want, they're going to just be expensive taxis if we don't have bombs.
@@HANUMAN7454 lol, good luck taking out all the "soviet era air defenses", when even their best jets and helicopters are routinely taken down my shoulder fired missiles.
There is a reason why Russia rarely uses its air "superiority", and it's not just because of (near)static air defense systems.
The WWI comparison is false but often made.
WWI wasn't a massive mercenary war, to start the contrasts off.
Your last paragraph about “more girls for you, if you survive” is exactly how the professor from “All quiet on the western front” convinced the boys to volunteer for the army. To be fair, they do get laid, but all of them also die by the end of the book.
he's literally fearmongering to help his audience of obnoxious young men who can't deal with peace LARP like they are going over the top any minute to die in a war.
When, in reality, something like WWI is never going to happen in the modern world. if there's total war, men and women will die alike in nuclear hellfire. and if there isn't, there won't be a draft, and professional soldiers will be the only ones fighting, most armies of which are gender integrated.
quit it with your childish fantasies of survival of the fittest and implied r*pe and get a fucking hobby
That was an excellent book. It made you feel you were there!
Man, so many interesting books are published every year.
Gotta develop a reading habit
@Cantake America what
That's not really what althist was arguing.
And actually... I'd argue that's potentially worse.
In AQOTWF, all the dudes go to brothels, what althist is saying is that by the time the war is over, there will be far fewer men because so many will have died, so the girls will have to compete over the men rather than the other way around, which would make the whole thing so much easier.
Only problem is, that's what happened in Russia after WW2 and the result is women dropped their standards for men so hard that they were no longer doing things like... forcing the men to not get drunk constantly, and doing stupid risky things that got them killed, which is why Russian society is so shit and Russian male life expectancy is so fucking low.
Women still need some leverage over men to force them to make their lives better or they just won't.
As an Indian, I want to make this very sure, we do not have any reason to fight against anyone. Our issues with China are not ideological or religious. It is borders at 20000 ft+. It is not something India and China will be exterminating each other for. We have good relations with US and Russia as well. We are not anyone's 'ally against autocracy' nor are we in any 'anti-colonial' warrior. Keep us out of this but good luck to everyone fighting. May the best nation win.
Thanks for all the comments. For people commenting about Pakistan. Pakistan will not be able to harm us per say. Their elite knows it. So, they will take every penny out of that state and fill their coffers until it is no longer possible. Pakistan was created by the British as a garrison state for precisely two reasons. 1) Stop USSR expansion into Indian subcontinent. 2) Contain India.
USSR is history. And the West powers want us to stand up to China, not to contain us anymore. So, Pakistan is a useless piece in the chessboard now. Its job is done and might implode soon (next 10 years).
An added comment based on the argument in the comments related to India-China-Pakistan capabilities in case a war does happen.
I think Pakistani airforce > Indian airforce(IAF). IAF uses backdated machines that are not at all good enough for 2023. The best we have is 36 Rafale aircrafts. In terms of weapons quality, US weapons > Russian weapons. India uses mostly Russian planes whereas Pakistani airforce uses F-16's. Those are pretty potent weaponry even today. Apart from airforce, I think Indian Navy is pretty superior to Pakistani Navy in almost all aspects. Ground military is similar in quality in terms of training and strategies, can't really call one of them "superior" to the other. But wars require more than machines & manpower. It requires logistics, fuel, food, money & international diplomatic support. Pakistan hugely lacks in these aspects.
In terms of India-China, India lacks everywhere. Army, navy, airforce, economy, infrastructure, logistics and even in nuclear weapons. Geography does help India though considering Chinese exports pass underneath us which runs their economy. Indian nuclear weapons have a yield of about are around 50 kilotons, Chinese nuclear weapons have a yield of around 4 megatons, also more in number. But India does have allies. I believe if US can get it's act together internally, they can defeat China. US weapons are top notch. No one comes close. India wants US, UK and EU support for deterring & containing China's rise for the next 20 years and invest in India for the next 20 years after which India will have the same capabilities that China has today. I am already seeing it happen in real time. Indian govt is spending incredible amounts on infrastructure & logistics across the country which includes ports, airports, semi high speed & high speed railway lines, expressways etc. All US & European software companies were always here since 2000's. Now we are seeing manufacturing moving here. 20 years from now, the capability scene will be different than that of today.
Buddy even if China attacks they won't win our army is the best in mountain warfare its almost impossible to beat us in Himalayas
@@karandullet380 They have the heights, economy and better weaponry. But it'll be difficult for both.
Hey being a coward and waiting to join winning side is American stuff. I didn't think Indians are the same😂.
I find it very pathetic america try to steer india as its ally against china while help pakistan back in the day, true to their scumbag nature
I sympathize with your sentiment, but not all wars are of our own choosing; it's likely that we'll be forced into a brief, limited but intense war with China in the Himalayas.
Great video, I've missed content like this from you, please keep it up!
I wasn't expecting you to be here imao
As someone who could potentially be sent off to fight in a war, this kind of thing keeps me up at night.
Technically 100% of the human race could potentially be sent off to fight in a war (Child soldiers, elderly reservists already demonstrate the possibility) but yeah, if you're a male and you are between the age of 21-70 you're going to participate in a war in your lifetime
Nah man war is fun and cool see you on the front
Yeah, same here. I can’t wait 😊.
get a higher education or a useful skill so you can get conscripted as a rear echelon guy rather than infantry
@@eno6712 Famous last words
I disagree that drones did not really affect the how wars are fought in fact, drones have a massive effect in terms of artillery and missle targetting etc. I agree that the Russo Japanese war shaped WW1 and Ukraine war will shape WW3, and I think drones will be much upgraded that what it is now, like being more relaible , more rugged cheaper to build, with accurate in terms of weapons handling. etc.
That all sounds like ‘fighting the last war but better’ territory and not the complete shakeup people usually mean when they say something revolutionizes war.
@@joshuamitchell5018 well drones were used in past wars first time usage was during WW2, when the Germans were raining drone bombs over the UK. Modern day drone warfare started during the Invasion of Lebanon in 82 where the Israelis used drones as decoys for Syrian SAMs. and also spoofed Syrian radars. Drones are revolutionary in this war as its seen the mass use of drones on a scale not seen in past wars. and witih inventive ways . Also the Ukrainians got to practice NATO doctrine and weapons on Russia which was the intended enemy.
I think AI will also be a massive revolution for the military during WW3. All World Wars created massive technological changes and I wouldnt be suprised that Drones/AI become the new revolution like the tanks did during WW1.
The individual soldier in a fox hole begs to disagree. There is no safe place for even one minute! Drone dropped grenades are fun.
Drones and satellites have had a huge strategic impact on the Russo-Ukraine War (2022 - ???). In WW1, a key problem was that even though the front was long, it was very difficult to amass enough soldiers for a major breakthrough due to observation aircraft - both fixed wing and balloons. We are seeing the same thing now. In WW2, the Germans controlled the skies over the Russian Front until late 1943, so they could usually detect massing Soviet forces. If Hitler was still around, satellites and drones would keep spotting his forces massing and the blitzkriegs would slam right into the enemy's massed firepower and defenses that had been alerted. I think this is why we see trenches, snipers, machine guns, and artillery dominating the Ukrainian battlefields - too many eyes in the sky again.
As an Indian, I'm not fighting a war for someone else. Last time we Indians had to do that, it was WW2 and even then, we had absolutely no business setting our foot in Europe with guns in hand.
completely agreed
I agree that the Indian people were badly mistreated in WW2.
The world has changed however. No one would or could force you to fight, but neutrality has its price too. It means, in the case of a conflict, you’d stand alone against Pakistan and China. Not only in a military escalation but also in terms of economic warfare.
If I were you I’d consider this. India is far too big and important to stay out of world politics. Eventually it might have to make a choice.
@@tempo5366 Have you ever seen two drunk people fighting outside a pub? This Ukraine war is like that. You get involved in the fight only if you are more friendly to any one guy. The other option is you are the police officer who wants to break off the fight.
In the context of Ukraine war, we are neither the police officer, nor particularly more friendly to one side over the other.
The last option is to help both sides negotiate. We tried that. Turks, Israelis, Chinese, Africans also tried. Neither side is willing to listen at this stage.
The Europeans should give it a try, try to talk to both Russia and Ukraine, instead of adding more fuel to the fire.
Regarding helping in some war against Pakistan or China, well those wars have already happened and in all cases, the collective West stood against India.
Do you know, why India developed its own GPS? Because, during the Kargil war, Indian Airforce was using GPS guided bombs to dislodge Pakistani infiltrators and US decided to switch off GPS in the region. With that kind of precedent, you expect us to trust the same group of people with our national security and territorial integrity?
Indian GPS is called Navic. Look it up in Wikipedia.
You look at this too simplisticly. Where the US rules, there is prosperity, look at Germany, Japan, Italy, South Korea, occupied by US after WWII. Where the russians rule, there is poverty and stagnation. Look at Eastern Germany, the whole ex eastern european block, all former soviet states, North Korea. The future of India depends very much upon who wins WWIII. Do not think for a second that if China wins and will dominate the planet, India will have its peace and freedom!
@@3ast3rn3r Feel free to buy a ticket to Warsaw. There will be people who will help you get to Kiev. You are the right kind of candidate they are looking for. I will get my popcorn.
One of the few people who will actually admit being wrong on some predictions. The ability to look at new information and actually update/change an opinion based on it is a rare characteristic. Salute
Agreed. One of his many talents and virtues!
They judge him for his dumb hot takes (of which they can be quite stupid) and ignore his general brilliance.
I also think he's wrong about Pakistan. I don't think they'd go to war with India, if China and India went to war. They don't want their country to completely collapse.
And making even dumber assumptions while also still caliming some mistakes from the old video to be true.
he's going to keep saying it forever. in 2026/2028, he'll change the whole narrative again
Drones are still relatively new technology for militaries so expecting some grand changes is a bit unrealistic. Still, they have helped improve how scouting is being done.
And even then in the Ucraine war Rusia and the OTAN are massively using drones and misiles. By some thing said in the video I think @Whaitalhist doesn't know that much about military things, the take on that Corea will survive because of their better training an weapons it's like a non existing factor, the only thing preventing NC attacks directly is the US and their bases, because you can give the SC the best arms you can but when the same men that are supposed to serve the country and protect it are demoralized because of how the society they live in (SC) and adding to that there aren't a lot of them, the majority being 30+ doesn't give a nice picture.
Interesting how both Koreas represent the extremes of two of the most popular ideologys and in either of both their population in "average" are happy.
Doesn't that mean they're essentially in like a hilariously identical place as airplanes in WWI?
They've done a lot for reconnaissance
I feel like drones are in a similar place to where planes were in the 1920's and 30's
@@MR-dc4od they even drop grenades
As a young man, I really hope this doesn't happen. Not just out of fear of dying and never getting to raise a family, but also fear of having to kill another young man. I remember going to discord servers where you had these muslim young men, they were just like me. They liked to talk about dinosaurs and shit. Perhaps from a different civilization and with much different beliefs about how a society should be run, but people I could joke around with. Unless someone's a sociopath, we're all cut from the same cloth, and I don't know how I could live with myself knowing that I was responsible for some Russian or Chinese mother's son never coming home
As a young person from India, I also hope that we will be able to transcend irrational hatred and dogma that could end up causing tremendous suffering and halt the wheel of progress for decades. The cycle of violence creates no long-term winners. Mahatma Gandhi stressed the importance of ahimsa (non-violence) for a reason:
"After all, however sincere my strivings
after Ahimsa may have been, they have still been imperfect and inadequate.
The little fleeting glimpses, therefore, that I have been able to have of Truth
can hardly convey an idea of the indescribable lustre of Truth, a million times
more intense than that of the sun we daily see with our eyes. In fact what I
have caught is only the faintest glimmer of that mighty effulgence. But this
much I can say with assurance, as a result of all my experiments, that a perfect
vision of Truth can only follow a complete realization of Ahimsa.
To see the universal and all-pervading Spirit of Truth face to face one must be
able to love the meanest of creation as oneself."
-The Story of My Experiments With Truth
Namaste and love from Northern India!🙏🇮🇳☮️☮️
I would feel no emotion while decimating the enemy, no matter who. They would do the same to me, after all.
@@TzarTsar There are certain necessary aspects of life, but the idea of what could have been would always be present in my mind during such a moment. It is true, however, that such principles can unfortunately take a backseat in the face of immense anger or misery. Hopefully, something can still remain.
Friend, in every generation there is a war. You can either fight for your country, or watch someone else die for your country. Your choice, but a brave man knows the right one.
As we are seeing in the Russo-Ukraine War (2022 - ???), young men get dragged into the army, trained, sent to the front, and find themselves holding a rifle and listening to bullets whizzing past. If you try to flee, you may be arrested or even shot by your own people. If you are too squeamish to kill the enemy, you can aim over their heads, but at some point he may be closing in to kill you. If you flee, you die. If you keep shooting to miss, you die.
It's a fairly unlikely scenario, given the significant logistic needs of a modern military force - lots of jobs behind the front line running drones, intercepting radio traffic, pumping fuel, driving trucks with ammunition, defusing bombs, and so on. However, it is a common scenario throughout history. In the 1500's to 1800's, the rearmost troops on a battlefield was a line of cavalrymen (from the upper classes of society), ready to slash down their sabers on the lower class infantry soldiers trying to escape the battlefield. The weapons have changed, but the social dynamics have not.
"CEO Of a geopolitics consulting firm" aka dude plays hearts of iron 4
Imagine millions of American Otakus joining the new Imperial Japanese Army to fight in The Great Asian war. Lol.
maybe they can party in Nanking (or maybe Beijing this time?)
@@jwil4286 this time it feel no sorry on China, they deserve to be ass kicked hard this time.
I want to soo fight for the Emperor.
@@jwil4286 the south east asian weebs would probably enact what the Korean-Japanese Forces would do with babies since that tale is always told to us no matter how young.
💀💀💀
Two uploads in a day? Neat!
Rudyard, you should make a video about how the blowback from WW1 and WW2 has affected our modern society. You briefly touched on that on your last video but I'd really love to see you go into detail on how it's affected the psyche and culture of the generations afterwards as a whole. Just an idea.
It's insane how much WW1 changed our society. I believe even worse than WW2. Something just broke inside the collective mind upon seeing such destruction, creating new art forms entirely. WW2 was just the cherry on top, with the first one tuned up to eleven and a lot of warcrimes on top.
I swear he already has… or made a video similar enough
@@smallben7744 I think this was one of the main concepts in the "how boomers ruined society" video.
Touch grass.
Boomer Truth Regime
Drones are a key factor in Ukraine. That and IR scopes and AWACS and satellite recon. The advantage has swung to the defense. Defenders can see the attackers coming way too easily.
that's a big reason why the Russian cauldron strategy is so powerful. They snake around and invade in an encirclement pattern, then they dig in and become the defenders.
Your mostly right in the wrong way yes defense is busted now but IE scopes aren't a major thing in the Ukraine war neither side really has good ones other then the nato tanks like leopard and abrams being sent, however the AWACS and Satellites are crucial to Ukrainians strategy like you kinda said. As for drones while yes being "important" are not close to breng a game chnager yet. It's actually funny to me because about 2 mouths after the Ukrainian war started I thought that drones and stuff were gonna be super big and important but its mostly been a pretty conventional war drones are just a added layer is all. The only problem I saw with the video was the tank pushes because Ukraine doesn't have enough to do a major tanks assault and russia proved there incompetence in that feild along with many others.
Yeah, this video honestly felt like absolutely very little research was done to back up these claims (particularly regarding military tactics and capability). Artillery and drones are the name of the game in Ukraine, so the complete dismissal of drones put an instant red flag on the rest of the video for me. While standard military tactics are still relevant (and always will be), it's important that such a pivotal tactical pillar not go completely dismissed. This is definitely a fairly disappointing, under-researched video for sure.
@@Infinityand1 it very opinionated so take the video with a grain of salt, its not the most researched video, which is fine.
@@PercocetPete He admits himself that he is betting against God.
I can respect a man who is humble enough to say that his predictions shouldn’t be taken as fact and that he will more then likely be wrong.
I think that "getting men to fight" will be a major issue for quite a few countries. Mostly in 'western' countries. Men went to war because they either had something to win or something to lose. And today? The number of lonely, disregarded and purposeless men is high and growing.
Telling men for decades that they are predators, oppressors, toxic and so on, won't help the case either.
That leaves "getting women" as the last option to motivate the men needed to fight. But seeing that, already today, between 35 and 60% of young men (depending on country and age range) in the west stopped dating actively because they think that women aren't worth the effort anymore....It's hard to see them being willing to die to protect these exact same women.
The craziest thing about the war in Ukraine is how it has become a resemblance of the first world war, more so than the second. The potency of ground air defense systems and the infantryman's ability to take out low-flying aircraft makes it extremely difficult to establish air superiority, which is the backbone of our doctrine since ww2. Simultaneously, the capability of even the average infantryman to easily and singlehandedly destroy multiple pieces of armor makes armored offensives across the plains a death wish. And if you try to use armor in more concealed areas, you are just as fucked because you're easily ambushed by squads with AT weapons. The result is the opposite of ww2! There are no sweeping offensives, envelopements, or pincers. It has forced the war into an artillery war with soldiers hunkering in trenches. What it comes down to is your infantry taking territory, and that can only be done at great expense. Both sides have learned that the hard way
Doesn’t help that Russia was incompetent and botched their invasion.
You missing the point. You don’t see swift maneuvering of IFV and tanks because of its shortage in UAF and terrorists. All mobility capabilities is supplied by West and it is lackluster to not say the least.
Thus, it’s just artillery duels, with house to house infantry fighting.
@@Dmytro_Kuts yeah but Russia has/had a lot of those especially at the beginning of the war?
While the comment makes a valid point about the challenges of establishing air superiority and conducting armored offensives in the war in Ukraine, there are other factors at play that resemble the situation in World War I. The most significant factor is the lack of effectiveness of the Russian military, which has been plagued by corruption, supply shortages, and outdated doctrine and culture.
Russian tanks and armored vehicles have been easily destroyed by ATGMs, which were developed in the 1980s, highlighting the inadequacy of Russian military technology. Additionally, Russia has not been able to fully utilize its air force due to a shortage of trained pilots and logistical challenges. These factors have contributed to the war in Ukraine devolving into an artillery war, with soldiers entrenched in trenches and engaging in slow and costly battles for territory.
Furthermore, Ukraine's lack of forces has prevented them from effectively driving out the Russian military, who have had ample time to dig in and use their conscripted soldiers as cannon fodder. Ukraine also faces the challenge of using Soviet-era equipment, which is outdated and no match for modern weaponry.
In summary, while the challenges of establishing air superiority and conducting armored offensives do resemble those of World War I, the primary reason for the current situation in Ukraine is the ineffectiveness of the Russian military. This has forced both sides into slow and costly battles for territory, reminiscent of the trench warfare of World War I.
The West really wants to drag this one out. I do believe we've found a new form of "gray zone" warfare where we feed the defenders just enough to prevent a quick victory on the part of the aggressor, while waiting for the sanctions to cripple the aggressor nation. A quick defeat of Ukraine OR a rapid retreat of Russia would have negated those economic levers to quickly, and call into question the whole "economic sanctions" method of response. Those measures take time to be effective, and a quick defeat or victory would call into question the whole method, as well as forcing a backlash on the politicians who put them in place as they caused pretty significant amount of pain on western countries economies.
Even though you’ve made videos on this exact topic before, I’m excited to see a new one. These days so, so much can change in a single year when it comes to geopolitics and warfare, and I value your perspective more than most.
I just turned 70. I was lucky in that I was in the last lottery draft call with a high number and was not going to be drafted. My friend had an older brother who went to Vietnam. My father fought in the last three months of WWII in Europe and told me he didn't expect to survive any invasion of Japan. He definitely believed the atomic bomb saved him. I have two grandsons. If they really had to go I'd counsel them to avoid becoming an officer. I can sure see why soldiers with experience have little interest in becoming officers. Most young men value their lives and know better than to become heroes. I've read of regiments of 500 men in Europe where every officer has been killed.
My father was a Marine in WWII who started as a private and rose up to sergeant. He was offered a chance to become a second lieutenant, but he asked if that meant his first assignment would probably be commanding a machine-gun nest, and the higher officer said it would. My father turned down the offer.
Perhaps some shot by their own troops.😉In the decadent west you have the professional troops who will fight whoever they are pointed at but after that i can't see many normies getting worked up to take on Russia or China.
None of those forces fought with current American/NATO doctrine.
@@stevenschnepp576 I'd not mind some elaboration for I have not thought along those lines. It is depressing to consider the tragedy foisted upon Eastern Europe because of Stalin. I have considered what Eisenhower had to have hand in mind. He needed to keep as much of an American Army as he was expected to need to attack Japan. While told of The BOMB he could not know how devastating it was going to be. The wars that you undertake are supposed to be undertaken only for the defense of your nation. Nations of all types of government have only two main duties: Defense first, and then Education a very strong second. There is no duty to be an aggressive nation attacking other nations to take from them their food, as is Baby Stalin's procedure in Ukraine. It is Putin's theft of Ukraines crops. It has been a UN Victory as weakened as the UN has become that food shipments to dependent nations was arranged. Starving to death adds to the weight of the misery that is much of the human experience. It is this weight of misery some thinkers go so far as to use to applaud human extinction. My brother once claimed to have had better days than some ever have as whole lives.
@@jody6851 Well it does pay more, at least there is that. I am reminded of the character in the Tom Hanks Production War in the Pacific about a winner of the Medal of Honor who basically won his medal for having the smarts during combat to move his machine gun before his location was perfectly targeted by the company's Japanese Adversaries. He so felt it was his destiny to be a combat soldier that after a year of selling War Bonds and enlistment drives he returned to be killed in an attack on another of the islands. I believe it was the historian Paul FUssell who wrote the US was losing 4,000 soldiers a day during the campaigns in the Pacific. I need to check that number but I know that it was an amazingly high figure of casualties. Such a high number that it was clearly a better choice to use The Bomb. At this time in world history it is Ukraine that has some severe decisions to make because it will lose when Baby Stalin Putin decides to use nuclear weapons or the finite manpower available to Zelenskyy clearly means defeat for Ukraine. My correspondent of greatest stature and reputation was Andre` Lewin who after a long career as a French Diplomat had become Chairman of the French UN Association offering the world suggestions for the reinvention of the UN. As it stands now the UN, has no effective enforcement capabilities of its own simply triggered by violations of international laws against wars of aggression. Ambassador Lewin in his White Paper believed that the UN required its own army and armed forces. The US asks of Zelenskyy that weapons it provides to him are contingent on his rejection of acts of violence within Russian national borders. For Zelenskyy whose armed forces are not as big and Ukrainians cannot be secure in any way because of its inability to withstand Russian attacks for but so long the option of assassinating Putin somehow loom large. Baby Stalin Putin threatens the life of Ukraine's President and he is known to have sent at least one team out with the mission of assassinating President Zelenskyy. It is simply unfair for the US to expect Ukraine to have a hands off policy towards Russia and the Russian President. The US can afford it, or at least it thinks it can, whereas clearly Ukraine cannot. Regardless of Ukraine's status as a member of Nato, or not, it was promised security when it gave up nuclear weapons.
"I don't know what weapons ww3 will be fought with, but I do know that I need a barber." - Frankenstein
So rather then one massive mega war like WWII, we will instead see a combination of civil wars and “limited” interstate wars. Often overlapping with some countries fighting a civil war and a world war at the same time (Italy and China did that in WWII).
That's literally how WWII started. Civil wars in places like Spain, and regional wars of conquest, eventually snowballed into something bigger.
Yeah, after an initial invasion attempt and being repelled, we might see some skirmishes here and there over a long time.
We might see less changes on a map and more on a society wide scale
This is what pope Francis said, that right now WWIII is being fought "in pieces" around the world.
@@illusion9423 So like the Thirty Years' War.
Tons of social change, tens of millions killed, borders barely move.
@@randlebrowne2048 so Ukraine is checkoslovakia and Taiwan will be manshuria?
It has been the the declining population crisis throughout the industrialized world that has soothed my fears of a potential WW3. Internal stability seems to be a serious issue for all potential players involved for the next few decades that my bet is on whoever can solve that first is probably gonna do pretty well in the latter 21st century.
Any time things unexpectedly (or rapidly) change makes war more likely, not less, whether it's because the old power is hoping to get one last hurrah before they lose their dominance or the new kid on the block wants to take advantage of their new power, war is how its done.
As for stability, one of the more popular and time tested ways to stabilize a government is to aim their malcontents at an 'evil' foreigner.
I think your insights are very valuable to this channel. And as to why the predictions are premature or off.
The difference between a crisis in the West and the China is that much of our problems are self inflicted and China’s are structural.
@@boobah5643 Wars only boost stability if you win, I don't think anyone in their right mind will say that Russia is more stable now than it was prior to the war. I think the cost to benefit calculus is very much against all of these nations that could potentially start something.
China invasion window is pretty narrow. Taiwan strait weather conditions are notoriously unforgiving with two monsoon seasons. That leaves just two brief "windows of attack" -- May to July and October --for such a large-scale operation, according to a US Naval War College report.
chinese seige an blockade of taiwan can happen at any time. And taiwan has FAR less ability to weather resource starvation.
@@hughmungus2760 Can China enforce a blockade? The waters around Taiwan are one of the busiest areas for maritime traffic. A lot of ships, not just those bound for Taiwan, traverse the Straits Crucial imports and exports for Japan, South Korea and even China itself would be at risk The chances of a “misunderstanding” with a Japanese or Korean ship can easily spiral out of control. Japan views sea trade as a matter of existential threat. Tbh i think China is little afraid of Japan
We USA could return in kind and blockade china . America possesses the ability to shut down maritime trade in the Straits of Malacca, Hormuz, Suez and Panama. Even if tawian surrenders and china blockade ends. Doesnt mean our blockade would end. If we wanted to be cheeky. We could do a little good cop bad cop with Japan We could make a public annoucment with angry Japansese man pacing i the background. while we agree to end the blockade with China because the blockade of West Taiwan just started. Our closing statement Confucius say Man who cut self while shaving, lose face
@@roman..leave.me.to.my.circles Yes. Simply by declaring a free fire zone in a ring 50 miles around the coast of taiwan. Any non-PLAN ship entering that zone would be automatically fired upon with antiship missiles the moment it is detected by radar.
Commercial shipping isn't exactly stealthy and no commercial ship is going to call china's bluff.
A blockade of malacca would cripple shipping for japan as well as the rest of asia. US allies in the region would crumple long before china does.
Even a selective blockade would create such a logjam in the straits that it might as well be blockaded.
As for japan. Oh china is not afraid of it. Infact china has been secretly hoping for a rematch, Those antiship ballistic missiles aren't just intended for american carriers.
@@roman..leave.me.to.my.circles that's why Russia now conducts Pacific fleet exercises, to keep Japan nervous and don't let it concentrate forces on Chinese direction
@@mrobocop1666 Id call that bluff. but i see your point though . I want japan nervous i want them ready. Really if was me id only nominally defend Taiwan. I would prefer to just blockade at the mallaca strait and other choke points Try to dare china to sail out to deep watert and break the blockade forcing a descive battle. Stop trade by sea and maybe civl unrest leads breaks out and CCP loses the mandate of heavan or Give me back my Taiwan
Who knows United States might just as easliy collapse from the inside . Im just a guy thinking out lound
Everywhere I go, no matter how hard I try to escape its pain and suffering, War Thunder always finds me...
Also keep in mind that the PLA has little actually experience. It hasn't proven itself as a fighting force. The only experience it has was the Korean War and the invasion of Vietnam, both of which were stalemates. And some border clashes with India, none of which went well for either side.
The last real war China fought in war in 1979.
Meanwhile since the end of the Cold War, America and Russia have fought or are currently fighting major wars.
America has fought in the Gulf War, War in Afghanistan, and the Iraq War
Russia has fought the Chechnya Wars and the Russo-Ukrainian War.
Experience goes a long ways. I love how the Chinese talk about hypersonic missiles being carrier killers yet they've never conducted a kill chain. How do they expect to identify a target from over 500 miles away, lock on a moving target going 35 knots in the open ocean, then execute the kill. They've never conduct a modern kill chain, ever, so their hypersonic missiles will be a non-factor.
I still cant believe China didnt plow trough Vietnam when Vietnam just got freshly bombed to the stone age by the US, worst of all the ones who held back their invasion wasn't even the battle hardened NVA who actually fought the americans and at the time were in Laos to deal with the Khmer. China's invasion literally got bogged by reservist border Militia troops with little to no combat experience.
@@Kaiserboo1871 and still, russia is incompetent military, and US has its ass fried in Syria
@@Kaiserboo1871Yeah fighting against mostly the local militia and border patrol for one month is the most “war experience” the Chinese army have ever gotten over the last decades lol
Calls to mind the War of the Triple Alliance. As a Paraguayan man, you weren't likely to survive, but if you did, the women (who outnumbered the men 8:1) were literally throwing themselves at you.
I believe Taiwan China conflict is the only conflict that could gas light WW3. And depending on how the Russian campaign in Ukraine ends up, that war would be "short" faught. Millions of computer and human made war games of invasion of Taiwan have been made and in almost all Taiwan withstands bc the invasion takes so much time since 1st you would have to embargo Taiwan for long enough to run down their stockpile of air defense missiles. In that time China will out spend itself and face mass famines, total economic collapse and eventually a coup.
Why would china face famine?
You pro Americans talk like you know everything don't judge a book by its cover bro
Like Russia spent all of their missiles and artillery yet Kiev just keeps spontaneously combusting every day for two years
Orrrrrrrr, china surrounds the island and bombs it into the ocean. This isn’t 1944 anymore bro, we don’t need a d-day invasion. Emp the shit out of the island and let the people fight themselves for resources and then send the army. Maybe after a year or two
@@OswaldHellboyyou anti Americans keep crying and America keeps winning. So salty..
King Leopoldo belongs on that list. It’s a trip how no one knows how many people he killed, and it’s because he did it in Africa.
Error one found: 3:22
(Saudi Arabia is not ideologically aligned, at all with any of the countries, it once was ranked 7th most Authoritarian State, with the reamining being African States and #1 being North Korea)
NOTE: Yes, Saudi Arabia doesn't have any enemies it would like to annex Terrritory from, although it has-major dispute with Iran, but as of 2023, Saudi Arabia and Iran seem to be trying to build-alliance and then later on NEWS comes out Iran is building military prescence in Iraq. (So idk about a Saudi-Iranian Axis)
Another Error: 20:10
Im pretty sure if anything remotely close happens in a situation to where Pakistan and India confront each-other, it wont be anything like the last confontration, I know people like to pretend, but this is real-life. We know the second Pakistan realizes that it's armies are completely falling apart, it will activate the All-Father Weapon and launch all of them at India, leading to a small-scale Nuclear with Pakistan and India. God hope that China wasn't attacking India at the same time, for we could see an Asian Nuclear War, with Russia being minorly effected in some parts of Siberia.
13:15
He seems to be mentioning only China's weakness through-out this video, without speaking on some major Western-issues, such as recruitment issues because the Generation now seems to be having trouble fguring out what gender they are. This is actually not a problem in China. Also yea China may not have the most effecient army, but sometimes in wars. Having larger numbers could be beneficial, Specially if your a country that has more population than your enemies continent.
Saudi and Iran will never be Allies both are competing for influence in the Middle East both have been fighting proxy wars for decades one small agreement brokered by the Chinese 😂(who can’t even beat the Indians in their border or deploy soldiers overseas and lie about each and everything ) won’t change anything. Saudis are still very much dependent on American weapons and American military for protecting itself
yeah, WIAH lives in own shell without keeping in touch with whats happening. There is a larger chance of Saudi allying with china than US...and Turkey is prob not getting involved in any war along with france which just took a neutral stance between China and US
And the highlight for me is him predicting Pakistan collapsing and no nuclear apocalypse happening over india...like bruh where are those 160+ warheads gonna go smh
its a monarchy with strong property rights... sure its auth af but they arent socialist
Any recruitment issues would fly right out the window when the government inevitably points out on national television that China has engaged in one of the largest genocides in history, and is actively engaging in crimes against humanity as we speak. Plus, a big reason we have recruitment issues right now is that there's no one to fight. People who join the Army are either looking for a second chance at life, or they want action, probably both. Those people who want action just aren't signing up right now, because we're not really actively engaged in conflict.
A war with a clear and present danger would change that in a heartbeat, especially in a country as proud of its nationality as we are. Sure, you look on the internet and you see people hating on everything American, but if you go out into the real world, even on college campuses, you'll find that most people actually really care about this country and want to fight to fix it rather than tear it down. Red and blue, we're very much more similar than we are different. IMHO, the people who want votes or views play up nonexistent differences to create an "us vs them" mindset that drives up engagement.
Not only all that, a war would give a lot of directionless and unmotivated individuals a cause to fight for. Maybe not a cause worth dying for, but enough to get them to sign up when a recruiter tells them they can be a mechanic or fuel truck driver.
Read up on the efficiency of the Chinese infantry. They have next to no combat experience and the only reason they would be able to kill anything is if there were a fuck tonne of them, in a wave attack.
24:31 Unfortunately, this has already played out with the Lost Generation and the Greatest Generation. They were separate wars but many argue the world wars are the same bad blood for a reason.
The lost generation males be like: **vanishes out of existence**
Fun fact, during the Victorian age, all the way to post WW2 the UK had a big female surplus, it was so bad, that 25% to 30% of women where single,
Many males instead of marrying, they became colonial workers, and some of them soldiers in garrisons, some immigrated and even married local women, thus causing a big female surplus,
Imagine being a women in first half of XX century in Britain,
It was probably like: no himbos 😢?
@@kingdomofbird8174 many doughboys in the US served in wwii as officers as well.
@@aspen1606 USA rarely had a female surplus problem, since most immigrants are male,
Probably there was a female surplus during the reconstruction era in the southern united states, but i don't think USA had any substantially deadly enough events to cause a longstanding female surplus,
Nowadays despite women being majority in USA population, males are actually majority in ages 0-42
Don’t misunderstand me, I love your content but this video is a monument to American military hubris. Never underestimate your enemies.
Having a game called war thunder as the sponsor for a video predicting WW3 is something else
That exasperated laugh at the end caught me so off guard I actually ended up laughing to the point of tears. Always love the content keep it up.
that part gave me Umineko witch laugh vibes
You think it's funny that billions of men might die?
@@machida58 no, he thinks a fake laugh is
Also I'm actually surprised he actually predicts China opening up like 5 fronts which is just fkn silly man, China would most likely focus on the pacific and China would focus more defensively on all other fronts.
What would a World War be without involving the rest of the world?
Yes. China wouldn't go to war and attack India. Ludicrous ideas.
He was listing potential catalysts for China going to war not that they’d work their way down a list, if they invade Taiwan they obviously wouldn’t fuck with India etc
@@trentn1127 India is actually neutral, and slightly Russia leaning. For india, they get most of their fertiliser and military equipment from Russia, should they get into a war with china, russia can just veto the whole thing by refusing to provide arms.
Dude is a psyop, lmao
What’s really scary is it’s entirely possible for an EMP attack which would black out the affected area. Because of this, the citizens would have NO IDEA of what’s really going on with no internet, TV, or comms. Most don’t think of this
EMP attack would immediately mean Nuclear War.
EMP isn't sci-fi?
@@driffbro3380 EMPS are very much a real thing. Although sci fi exaggerates it’s effects by a lot.
@@bensmall6548 can they take out an entire city's power or is that hollywood exaggeration?
@@driffbro3380 Hollywood exaggerates them by showing all tech that uses electricity shutting down. Older cars, shielded electronics, and anything that doesn’t use a computer chip will still work as EMPs damage computer chips.
„To be united by hatred its a fragile alliance at best” - darth kreia
The sith triumverate still purged the jedi order because fighting amongst themselves. The steel and tripartite pact were also really just held together by the threat of soviet or western intervention.
I think that the influence of the Mongol empire on the red alliance is definitely real, though I would think it has more to do with the fact that the Mongols spread and set up centralized systems everywhere they conquered thannthe treatment of Women.
I think another commonality is that most of the areas conquered by the Mongols were conquered because they were accessible by land armies.
Most of the democratic nations, in turn tend to be the inverse, they are areas that are accessible by sea power and were thus most influenced by Britain and the United States, as well as being more oriented to the current world order that is glued together by maritime trade.
In other words, I would argue that the geographical realities of being oriented toward sea-power, or land-power is the primary factor influencing which side nations are on.
To support this, I think that the nations that are able to be influenced by both sea or land power are consequently the nations that uave the most conflict or switch sides the most.
Specific examples would be Vietnam, which has had civil wars and has generally changed sides between Russia's land based coalition, and NATO since WW2. This is because Vietnam is very vulnerable both to land and Sea influence.
Another example is Korea, who is a peninsula with the land facing side literally being a vassal state of China, and the South being thoroughly intertwined with NATO.
I think youc old use India as an example as well. Generally India has actually been Sea-influence oriented, because the Himalayas are so impossible that land invasions have almost always failed against India, but in the age of modern airpower the balance has shifted somewhat and I think this is part of why you don't see India brazenly challenging Russia or its Allies.
Or maybe communism, and the end of colonialism, specifically in the cold war lead to it. The USSR, or China had close relationships with all those countries that were formed due to anti European and american sentiment.
These relationships are the continuation of those, and not anything to do with the mongol empire.
I'll believe WW3 happens when I actually see it happen. We've gone more than 80 years since the end of the second world war, and all that I've seen over that period of time is the presence of nuclear weapons basically SUPPRESSING aggressive campaigns between major world powers, like the kinds that defined the first two world wars. We've had a multitude of wars since 1945, and none of them have been between two countries that were both, at the time, ranked in the Top Ten, militarily. One or the other has been (especially the dozen or so involving the United States), but never have both opponents stood on a level playing field. Don't believe me? Just look at Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, and some of the other "major" conflicts in the past 80 years. Not exactly "meat grinders," if you ask me. So forgive me if I'm a little skeptical when others say that WW3 is inevitable. It is not. No country's government will admit this, but NUCLEAR WEAPONS SCARE EVERYONE! And no one wants to be responsible for the theoretical end of mankind (not even someone as crazy as Vladimir Putin, otherwise he'd have launched at least one tactical nuke at Ukraine by now).
Yup.
Nuclear war doesn't mean the end of mankind. It could mean the end of number of cities but it's not like when the Russia is attacked by nukes it will start carpet bombing every continent with ICBMs. It will target major cities in the US and Europe and that it. The West will do the same with Russia and China and others. Hundreds of millions of people would die and humanity would be pushed back by 100 years but it's silly to say that it would be over.
What are you talking about tactical nukes. He never sent any nukes to Ukraine at all.
Kirbo I mean no offense but I think you misread. They said that Putis hasn’t even used a tactical nuke.
@@ataraxia7439 oh. I see now 😅
No offense but you need to find someone you trust that just specializes in modern military matters, there’s some stuff I noticed that was wrong here from a just casual viewing and a specialized expert would really bring a lot to the analysis
Can you enlighten us?
Very true, i like his videos usually amd I agree with a lot. But, he often doesn't properly argument or cite his opinions.
A huge flaw in this video is assuming total incompetence in China based on the last year, instead of basing that on a larger time period. A totally opposite thing is assuming that South Korea would be able to defend themselves from China and North Korea, just because they did so in pre-modern times.
@@nikolavideomaker not very reliable to use the competence of a military as an arguing point if they haven't been in a big conflict recently. russia is fighting ukraine and have been incompetent, but china and south Korea haven't been in a large conflict recently. just because they look incompetent doesn't mean they will be incompetent when the bullets start flying, and vice versa
@@Sempapax Rudyard is don't know stuff
@@Sempapax because I am not a military historian or any other subject matter expert I think it would be better if I didn’t just type out some long text wall, instead I’ll plug in the channel Jimmy Thomist he has offered some really good unbiased analysis about the Ukraine war, also sorry for the late reply
Hello, Whatifalthist. I've been a fan of yours since last year, but my little had been a fan for longer. He and I discovered you separately, one day we were talking and I mentioned you, and was pleasantly surprised when he already knew who you were. In fact he was such a big fan that he would save your videos for special occasions so as not to run out of content from you. I bring all this up because a few weeks ago he killed himself to escape his chronic pain. I just wanted to thank you for giving us more stuff to talk about during what would turn out to be our last few months together.
Sorry for your loss, stay strong bro😢
That is what happens when you are an atheist.
(Can't wait for the angry comments for stating a fact)
@@eatinsomtin9984 - Hey, wtf? Ignoring whether this is the “fact” you assert, why say this here? Just looking for attention or a fight? Because to me, saying something like this is what happens when you have no class.
Sorry for your loss, from the bottom of my heart.
Shame... im sorry for your loss. It does say something when men go to channels like these, Men as a whole are suffering in silence and we know its pointless to talk about anything with being seen as tools and nothing more then his ability to work. Things just looks bleaker and bleaker
17:12 I think I’ve missed this in your old prediction. However, as a guy from Thailand I would definitely ageee with your new decision and say I don’t think this is possible.
First many people don’t realized how laughably weak Laos and Cambodia is compared to Vietnam. The Vietnamese has one of the strongest military history and most nationalistic populations with a recently booming economy and trying to be an American ally. On the otehr hand Cambodia and Laos are barely functioning states with Cambodian government recently declaring themselves emperors and Laotian people being mountainous and having large zomia decends not really caring that much about what the government say and won’t be hyper nationalistic. Their economic is laughably poor and laos population is nearly nonexistent compared to Vietnam. In your map Thailand fall to Chinese influence which I would say that it’s as a Thai person, even with Chinese heritage and a pro Chinese father side, Thai people across the political spectrum don’t like the Chinese very much and with Thai national identity forming around prolonged independence from the Europeans and is actually an anti communist American ally during the Cold War, people here have a strong identity around indepence and would immediatly go agaisnt China if it ever slowly conquers Laos. Cambodia is pretty weak and unstable but the population is extremely nationalistic, if anyone have come across internet Cambodians you will know that. thus I don’t think a full slow Chinese takeover will be allowed and just like in much of Africa there will be a native protest agaisnt Chinese incursion . It now just depends on whether America will support Thailand with most of the population being anti Chinese especially the new left but also the old left and the right aren’t very keen on it either. If China can keep the coups and the country break into civil war due to the return of Thaksin or if America support thaksin China will win but if America put even the smallest support for Thailand it will definitely side with Vietnam and squeeze Laos and Cambodia out of existence. The only possible real war would be if China only use these two country as passing ground like Russia and Belarus but with it being so mountainous I don’t think that’s possible.
I agree that vietnam will defeat Laos and Cambodia but if America support it or If thai society can get itself together they will definitely join in with vietnam and crush Cambodia and Laos. However I don’t know what Myanmar will do since the coup might support China and could declare a two front on Thailand but also it’s not really that coherent and the millitary technology is pretty backward.
I hope that's the case but with how fast Thailand surrendered and then allied with Japan back in WW2, I'm not so sure
It’s gonna be fucking wild seeing the descendants of the Vietcong, the Imperial Japanese Military, and the US military all working together to fight the same enemy.
Imagine telling someone in 1942 that in 80 years, America and Japan would be fighting together as allies. Imagine telling someone in the 1968 the same thing with Communist Vietnamese and American forces.
@@onlyfacts4999 unlike common belief it’s more complicated
But long story short, they didn’t surrender, at leats to the Thai government they thought they are allying with Japan
It’s a complicated situation so let me explain
It started with general p(plaek phibunsongkram) when he take power. He was a strong nationalistic right winged authoritarian leader, not exactly facist but pretty similar. He was trying to take back Cambodia and Laos with some even claiming he has a plan of “greater Thailand” but idk how true it is. He install large authoritarian cultural reform movement making many old cultural aspects illegal and creating nationalist norms for Thai people making stuff like standing in front of the national anthem every morning and evening legally required. Additionally, along with him being a general he knows Thailand couldn’t really resist the sheer Japanese strength so he allied and allow them to go pass Thailand since their goal is to attack Myanmar. Afaik the Japanese also tell general p they will help him get parts of Cambodia and Laos and if they won the entirety of it will be given to Thailand under the Asian co prosperity sphere so he falls for it.
However, this does not reflect the thai population at all with large numbers of people already hating general p from his questionable rise to power and many dislike Japanese rule. However, the general Thai people prioritizing peace and harmony doesn’t really want to rebel at first so you don’t see massive anti Japanese movements alone and they know they would lose anyway. However, later in the war, the Japanese started losing grounds and with back up from the Americans the free Thai movement rebel and overthrow general p. They then, with American backing, say that the alliance was “unofficial” and the country have stayed “technically neutral” with the alliance being jsut th decision or general p alone which most people don’t agree with and he just do bc he know he won’t win anyway. This is also to keep the country from paying war reparations from being in the axis. Thailand have always been amazing at diplomacy so it’s not surprising to me they pull this off.
I don’t think the same thing will happen with the Chinese. It’s not as unwinnably strong as the Japanese.Japan have defeated multiple strong nations inside and outside south east Asia like Vietnam and China and general p have a similar ideology. None of that exist in Thailand today and If China pour in a small number of troops struggling over the mountains of Laos they will be resisted. Japan also target the city of Bangkok as well with its navy which is extremely important due to how centralize Thailand is so China fighting in the north east will likely be resisted and it will be a long while before they take enough of the country to surrender. There’s a large leftist ideology in the north east so maybe China can pull on that but I doubt they will fall for it. With so much Thai identity being around liberty from foreign powers I doubt they will give up to the Chinese
This also depends on th action of ofc, asean and the Americans. ASEAN isn’t that strong but it does influence how south East Asian nation respond. currently they are anti Chinese with the problems in the South China Sea, especially from Indonesia. From what I’ve heard from my Indonesian friend on the internet they are extremely anti Chinese with even anti Chinese racism rising among young generation,something expected for a nation with a rough history agaisnt its Chinese minority. it’s too wrapped up in its own problem to fight China tho but it could still influence asean decision if it doesn’t break first.
@@Kaiserboo1871 yeah fr
I wish American boomer led education stop forcing the Vietnam war with Vietnam as American enemy down the kids throat tbh, many places in south east Asia are very pro America especially Vietnam
Most Chinese Allies in south east Asia are dysfunctional state like Laos Cambodia Myanmar and Brunei while stronger powers like Vietnam Thailand Indonesia Malaysia and Philippines are pro America.idk where Singapore lie exactly tho but they are just rich. As a city state they wont have the manpower to wage aggressive wars. China often side with the more authoritarian and hated side of society like the coup in Thailand and Myanmar and the absolute monarch of Brunei. Thus, the more dysfunctional the country the easier it is to fall to China. If it can keep itself together it will be with America.
Unless anti Chinese racism start rising in other parts of south east Asia which seems to be on the way in many places
I hope it wont be as strong here, bc I’m ethnically more than half Chinese
Regarding the potential PLA amphibious invasion of Taiwan. Remember that during WW2 when the US Navy/Marines had perfected amphibious operations, they decided not to invade Formosa because it would have been too difficult. They instead skipped it and landed at Okinawa.
taiwan could be besieged and starved out quite easily the island produces no oil and only 1/3 of its food. The mainland can effectively send the island back to the stone age in the first couple of hours by hitting its power plants and infrastructure hubs.
@@hughmungus2760 but does the PLAN have that capability? While in sheer tonnage it might be the largest fleet in the world, tonnage is not the same as combat capability. Much of it is coastal and riverine ships (Brown Water Navy) as opposed to seagoing, and IIRC the PLAN is still lacking in terms of training. The Taiwanese have (I might be wrong here) similar anti-ship capabilities, and so long as they keep their eastern coast safe from interdiction, they can be resupplied. And while land-based anti-ship missiles are not perfect, the logistics of operating on the other side of the island, subject to fire, and likely bearing the brunt of any initial response by a third party, means that the eastern coast of Taiwan will be very hard to blockade.
Realistically, all the Taiwanese need to do is holding on for the first two weeks or so, while the US decides to show up. at best, any fight between the USN and PLAN will be like Jutland, at worst, the largest vessels of the Chinese Fleet will play a modern day Bismarck.
Even the Japanese Fleet could seriously disrupt any attempt of the Chinese to starve Taiwan into submission, and it's not unlikely that the Japanese would also get involved.
@@delgado.adrian160 Taiwan is less than 100 miles off the chinese coast. A 'brown water navy' is more than enough to keep the entire island blocked off.
The US realistically can't lift the blockade of taiwan without striking the chinese mainland as chinese land based bombers carrying air launched antiship missiles can make short work of any ship attempting to run the blockade. Then you have land based rocket artillery that will blow up any ship docking in taiwan. the entire island is going to be a giant shooting gallery.
The US will essentially have to escalate to full scale bombardment of the chinese mainland to suppress airfields (including ones deep inland for the strategic bombers) and rocket batteries to even have a hope of keeping supply lines open to taiwan. which is pretty much escalating to a hairs breadth of nuclear war.
Even then, the chinese can make it nightmarishly difficult using submarine launched naval mines which will take hours to deploy and months to clear
In reality, the US navy wouldn't go within 1000miles of the chinese coast because the moment they pop up on chinese radars, 100 antiship missiles get fired at them from the coastline.
@@hughmungus2760 Anti-Ship missiles are a bit more complex than an Anti-Air system, especially if you need to aim at a moving target, in the middle of the ocean, 1000 miles away. Having them is not an "I win" button. Nor do they guarantee that any country could eliminate any other country's fleet before reaching their target.
The US won't even need to get directly involved. Simply turning the Taiwan Strait into a warzone will kill shipping into China's main ports (which means that China loses the fuel it needs to keep the lights on, let alone fight a war). The US fleet has options besides showing up in the Taiwan Strait, such as blocking Chinese traffic or China-bound traffic through Malacca (again, killing their oil imports). Especially if China is trying to blockade Taiwan into submission instead of outright invading. It then becomes a matter of whether Taiwan breaks first, or Mainland China.
If there are actual combat operations, the US fleet, while smaller in overall tonnage has more capable combat vessels, especially operating in open water, and enough of a fighter screen to deter or inflict heavy casualties on Chinese land-based bombers
And again, IF, as you said earlier, China is simply starving Taiwan into submission, they won't count with land-based weapons on Taiwan's eastern shore, which is also at the end of their realistic operative range.
@@delgado.adrian160 ships are alot bigger and slower than planes, and the ocean doesn't have alot of terrain cover so no. Antiship missiles are alot easier to aim.
If anything the US attempting to fire back at land based launchers are going to struggle because the vast majority of them are mobile and well hidden.
Finding and tracking US fleets off the coast of china won't be hard. China has no shortage of space based recon assets and over the horizon radars. As well as recon aircraft and drones.
The only hope the US has is to stay well out of range of the majority of chinese missiles and hope the few that do get fired can be intercepted or aren't as accurate as they're advertised to be. Aka. Hope and pray.
For the US to get into the taiwan straits with surface vessels, That is basically impossible. If anyone is going to have a jutland moment its the US foolhardily sailing into a swarm of chinese antiship missiles thinking its still the 90s
Theres an off chance the US might get a sub or two into the straits but its unlikely they will survive when outnumbered 10:1 by chinese diesel electric subs lying in ambush
Taiwan's resources will run out Much faster than the mainland because the mainland at least still produces about 1/3 of the fuel it consumes.
With adequate stockpiles, rationing and pipelines to Russia, china could stretch that out for years
Taiwan produces no fuel and the few fuel storage locations it has will likely be blown up early on.
You can blockade the malacca straits for a while but you choke off the flow of oil to all of asia and countries like Japan and south korea will likely buckle before china does forcing you to lift the blockade eventually. especially if taiwan has already fallen and you're effectively hurting everyone friend or foe for a lost cause.
Chinese bombers all have standoff weapons that outrange US destroyers. they can lob these at any US fleet from well out of their engagement range and fly back to do it again in 12 hours. Each chinese bomber can carry upto 6 supersonic antiship missiles or 2-4 hypersonic ones. And china has over 200 bombers.
This is on top of the vast numbers of land based missiles and ship based missiles which range from subsonic sea skimmers to hypersonic glide weapons.
Chinese land based missiles can reach the western shore of taiwan too. taiwan isn't very big.
I have big respect for being willing to change your mind when new information is presented.
Except he's still working off faulty backwards logic &twisted info so he'll forever be behind the 8ball.. I just hope to god the analyst's in SADboi division are better than he is because he analysis is atrocious, damn near fox news level bad
Because he barely has his own mind
This video is "all western propaganda delusion 100% speedrun". Idiots like these have been predicting "rapid collapse of China" since the Mid 70's and reality is completely opposite. How about a little dose of truth in seeing how US banks collapsing now are comparable to 2008 levels and how US is into a recession? Such "strong institutions"
Normally, I'd agree, but his info was way off from the beginning.
In 25 days we’ll know if we can afford groceries again or headed to WWIII
3:30 meanwhile Turkey with Greece: am I a joke to you?
Turkey doesn't want to pay for a war with Greece and Greece can't pay for anything. They'll be fine
23:48 actually, the UK is expected to grow from around 68 million to 72-74 million by 2050
I think that might be immigration based? It says natural growth.
Do the Pakis, Indians and Arabs pumping up UK's birth rate count? Will they act as British or as non-British, come push to shove?
@@Arandurion
Mohammad is the most popular baby name in Britain.
@@brentlolacher3000 yes, as a natural consequence of the fact that a disproportionately high number of Muslim babies are named so.
@@brentlolacher3000 And Mohammad the Brit is more likely to fight against Britain than for her.
Real OGs remember the first upload of this which was 16 seconds shorter!
There can never be winners of a war, only survivors
i think its just a soft people thing war is peace and war in advance in tech and other things.
He biggest thing is also the fact that prepping a sea invasion would be really easy to spot on satellites meaning Taiwan has months to react to an assault
China could just invite Taiwan to join through an open election, which Taiwan would be happy to do. Provided the US is not aware of it.
@@dansmith1661 I've always wondered why China didn't just do exactly this; if they weren't so aggressive they could've tried a honeypot scheme for integration & it might've worked + U.S. wouldn't have been able to interfere so easily
@@glint6070 They screwed it up when they destroyed all confidence in the "one china two systems" principle from what they did to Hong Kong.
while i do agree nukes could easily be off the table for China and West, however, Pakistan will use nukes in this scenario if India goes offensive. they do not have the discipline to restrain the use of nukes and they will be desperate enough with existential threat to use them. I do wonder if India will get involved at all to be honest. India is a very shrewd country and probably the best geopolitical player in the world and believe they would thrive in post-WWIII world.
i do also think there will be opportunistic countries in the middle east, africa (Ethiopia comes to mind) that know they can initiate a war with neighbours with little to no international players intervening. This is why i do think a "world war" is likely versus regional east asia one.
whoever was resposinble for Pakistan having nukes is the biggest fool in history
@@shettlock In a sense, yes. But in the grand scheme of things, I don't put much stock in Africa as a region because they're pretty much always at war, lol.
Because India knows after war the west will not come to save their economy 😂😂
I think the reason China didn't invade Taiwn is, well they are afraid, they probably wanted to see outcome of UA ru war since they have similarities, arguably ru was in BETTER position to win then China was against Taiwn... And they failed, and if Spring/Summer is successful for UA, then yeah. Considering China trying the diplomatic game(uniting Saudis and Iran and trying to negotiate Pakistan Israel relationship) maybe they're looking for a way out? Or biting their time for more favourable environment.
Happy 500k, Rudyard! I absolutely love your videos and you are my spiritual leader.
EDIT: Guys I didn't mean it literally, I meant he's like a mentor to me.
Spiritual leader is a bit intense bro
He's a great candidate for "Spirit Animal." This dude is brutally sophisticated for one so young. He's interested in all the same things I am. I'm a decade older, I have life-long friends, friendly acquaintances... nobody likes to talk about this stuff except for people like us who congregate around content like this.
@@frankcrosby6222 Touch grass. Go for a walk. Think for yourself.
I really feel sorry for you guys.
You guys are the kind of young men that will blindly follow any leader that gives your life a semblance of purpose.
wooohooo a new Cult too join, can we burn witches????
Funny how you consistently get your predictions wrong without losing the slightest bit of overconfidence in them.
just warch his videos and expecr the exact opposite of this… now you jabe a perfectly predicted future
He totally spotted the date of invasion of Ukraine.
@@adamnesicoSo did I back in 2015. Not impressive, his predictions and certainty are just maddening.
@@J_X999 I always say: If u can do better than him do it: Maje ur own predictions.
Agreed, he does talk a lot of shite.
given recent politics, wouldnt expect India or the gulf states to be US allies
As an Indian I would like to say that all the recent politics have been highly influenced by the inflation and concerns regarding oil/gas security(as Russia offered it for cheap price).
And also the current Modi government hates Biden administration, because of it's interference in the internal politics of our country and support for Pakistan. I think Biden want to weaken the right wing governments of other countries.
But even with all these thing if there's any threat to national security they India would most likely ally with US but it's completely *Neutral* for now.
@@nitinmeena8416 As an indian I would never want to ally with the West or anything of the sort. West is incredibly exploitative and doesn't have a good track record in any place they get heavily involved (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc)
@@WastedBananas what will we do in a two front war? Or a three front war? Russia is our ally but they are allies of china too. I don't think they will come to help us.
Incredible amount of detail offered. Thank you for sharing this thought provoking presentation
he has no credentials, very unreasonal amount of conclusions based on very little data, track-record of doing bad predictions, fearmongering and US propaganda.
He litterally just made a random blob to mark taliban territory on a map, and didnt include cuba, north korea, or Nicaragua as russian aligned states
He also said drones made no impact on warfare, and even says it didnt change anything in Ukraine. Its just factually wrong in everyway. If they made no difference you wouldnt see both sides scrambling to get them
I cant even finish a comment without him saying something terribly wrong. China isnt reverting to maoism, its just becoming more authoritarian and nationalist.
Their military industrial complex also isnt as bad as americas like he says. In america the goverment supports the companies forming monopolies, and allows them to increase prices sometimes 9 fold over a decade for no reason, while giving millions in campaign funds to politicians.
In china neither happens. Chinas military production is often state owned, or has to operate within a reasonable profit margin, and cannot donate in elections. They by definition do not have a military industrial complex, as their military capacity is dominated by the goverment, not corporations. You may as well just call it a military complex instead, cause industry isnt as important
Thats all im gonna say. He just wont stop spouting this nonsense
Whatifalthist:"no one in the American alliance would declare war on one another". Greece and Turkey : hold my beer
I really wanna know why every map I see if ww3 has India on the side of America when India's greatest historical ally is Russia, if anything I could see them being neutral.
India wouldn’t be subject to the interests of the US or Russia, as seen by their exploitation of Russia while russia is vulnerable, so they couldn’t really sway India. What we do know about India is that they are in fierce opposition to china in any way possible. This will lead them to make a strategic alliance with the western bloc against China to pursue their own national interests, similar to vietnam.
@@Memelord-zj7rn India would not formally ally with the West UNLESS the Chinese make incursions on to Indian territory
I've always seen India as an oportunist. They'll jump to the side that is winning.
Similar to Italy in WW1. They were part of the Central Powers on paper, but joined the Entante in '15.
I appreciate all the responses, people who are much more involved than me can help me learn a little bit.
India is alied with america against china. They only get put against russia when idiots like whatifalthist decide russia and china are allies in the third world war
Great analysis, lots of thought provoking perspectives
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." ― Albert Einstein
I commend your humble self correction! We need more of this, sir. Thank you!
Harder to compare wars than may initially appear, & thus predictions are easily skewed. Remember the so-called Second Hundred Years War, a series of global, regional, & local wars & revolutions lasting from ~1688 to 1815. It included the characteristics you described distinguishing the Thirty Years War from the World Wars as well as those unique to WW2. Also, a number of historians consider World Wars 1 & 2 one long war. Each WW1 & 2 were preceded by waves of border wars, civil wars, & revolutions, and followed by such. Some historians even lump the Cold War in to an extended war circa 1914-1991. Thing is fighting tends to keep going even after the main war stops. Fanatical Nazis kept fighting - on a small, terroristic scale - in Occupied Germany into 1948, Ukrainians fought Stalinist Soviets well into the 1950s, and on & on. I do find it hard to believe nuclear weapons won’t be used by a side losing badly on conventional battlefields. But perhaps you’re right - the planet devolves into a static conventional global war a la George Orwell’s “1984” that sustains itself by not going nuclear but instead grinds on forever & ever like some of those fictional wars in Star Trek dramas.
It should be mentioned, that most of the modern satellite network was an order of magnitude more expensive to put up in the first place than it would be to replace now. We can reuse rocket hardware (not the fuel, which is the cheap part) a dozen times now for launching things like satellites. And, which modern tech, a several ton satellite can be replaced with one of a a few dozen launched in a cluster now. Even the space debris cause by such warfare would last a very short time, maybe years at most, before mostly reentering the atmosphere. I don't think the capacity to cripple economies by going after satellites exists to the extent you express, as of this decade. Not even just doing a fanboy thing over Space-X, we've just demonstrated that getting things can be much cheaper, and be done in greater numbers for the same volume, so the societal investment is not nearly as much.
Not sure if the USN would want to operate directly between Taiwan and China during a conflict. Being that close would provide minimal warning for ASM strikes and it's fairly shallow IIRC which might make sub operations problematic.
4:49 As a Pakistani student of Economics, my professors told me that laws of economics doesn't apply to Pakistan. That's strange Pakistan is! So don't be surprised. 😅
That kind of thing my economics teacher also said once and I am from India
It already did.
@@krushnaji4940 South Asian are different because of being sentimental. This is the only reason I can think of.
western points of view are so hilarious and peter zeihanish
@@Houthiandtheblowfish It won't be funny when we stop giving you money, I swear.
The only winners would be the cockroaches
👀
Turkey? and also mushrooms
There was a joke in family guy where Peter said that he can't wait for WW5 and when his wife asked him why he called it WW5 he said that it would be worse than both WW1 and WW2 combined. 😂
"Demographic ejaculations" never saw that in my textbooks.
There was a financial crash. We have a Madoff=SBF, a Lehman Brothers in SVB. Instead of tanking down, a $450k mortgage went from $2k payments to $3k payments. 3% to 7% doesn’t sound bad until you realize it’s a 130% increase in the cost of money.
After WW1: maybe we shouldn't do alliances. _creates the League of Nations._
After WW2: maybe we shouldn't do alliances. _creates United Nations and NATO_
After WW3: maybe we shouldn't do alliances...
2:20 As someone who is married to and knows many Kazakhs and other central Asians, I can faithfully say that most people in that region genuinely hate the Chinese.
And as of recently have a strong distaste for Russia
considering how they are surrounded by both, they either won't make a difference in such a war. Or one of the 2 powers won't give them the choice. Like how Canada will be forced into whatever the US wants if it goes that far.
@@avroarchitect1793 honestly it's not really proximity that is the problem for central Asia....it's the fact that the regions main economy is based on being the middle man of Trade
With Thier two biggest contributers collapsing, they too will suffer
@@myname-pe2pe without a doubt. But the global trade system is starting to collapse as it is. So its par for the course either way
@@purple.requiem Honestly I have been saying for Years that America needs to stop assisting Europe so much and focus more on South America and Central Asia.
Though unfortunately most Americans have no Idea Kazakhstan is even a country let alone where it is, and those who do only know it from Borat.
On top of that the blatantly corrupt culture in the post Soviet World makes it impossible to support such an effort.
Honestly if Kazakhs could come together to reduce the amount of corruption there, more Western powers would be willing to invest in the country
@@myname-pe2pe we already have lower corruption ever since the a$$hole dictator stepped down in 2019.
And our new president is trying to be independent. He has distanced Kazakhstan away from Russia. Kazakhstan even accepted men who fleed mobilization conscription into the country.
Problem is America is so focused on a few countries and doesn't provide an economic partner alternative to many developing nations such as Kazakhstan or Belize or Bangladesh. America is so sloppy at these kinds of things and it needs to stop because countries have no choice but to partner with evil China. And America wonders, "why did China get so powerful".
China’s moves recently have only confused me. I personally struggle to see a scenario where China starts a war with the US and comes out on top, especially considering the Chinese economy is actually looking significantly more fragile than initially predicted. Yet, they keep on putting pressure on Taiwan like they’re ready to invade before just not invading. This makes me think that the Chinese themselves don’t believe they can win the war. Not to mention, like you said about a revolution, if they start a war this could spike unrest in the country and quickly have a civil war, or at least extreme internal troubles, on their hands.
As a Chinese person, I think China is in a much better position than the United States. Prices are stable and supplies are plentiful.
At least there are no mass robberies in China.
ruclips.net/video/72vc0hY2rPQ/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/uJiWNCiRH2s/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Vl8QxqTkRzY/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/YUMSTp2jfXk/видео.html
Are you sure you understand China? Eastern culture is different from Western culture. If you use Western thinking to speculate on Eastern decisions, do you think you can draw correct conclusions?
It's always been a goal of the CCP to conquer Taiwan, as it is standing prove for Mao's failure. Since Xi is banging the nationalist drum like no one before him since Mao, he has to make the call one day. He's now dictator for life, but it is his number one goal to have the "re"-unification be his legacy (every CCP chairman has to have that one great thing they did). It's not about rationality, look at the whole Corona situation that has lead to protests the likes of which haven't been seen there since the Tiananmen massacre.
@@jayhill2193 you guys curse yourself for forcing C2 kill. Worst thing in history
@@jayhill2193 That’s a good point, but it also makes me wonder why they keep holding off from launching an actual invasion in that case. If it is indeed a question of when they invade, what are they waiting for? If anything, the longer the Chinese wait the harder it will be to come out victorious.
I take issue with your assessment that India would be an American ally. India is not formally a member of any military alliance and has always adopted a foreign policy opposed to such a notion. This policy of non-alignment has survived since independence, and there is little sign currently that India would abandon it. The issue for India to join a particular side is that it has strong ties with both Russia and America. Russia supplies military equipment to India and has supported India in every conflict it has fought since 1970. So India is unlikely to fight Russia. As for America, they have strong economic ties with India and they also work with them on various security matters. So India won't fight America either. Therefore it is most likely that India would not take a side in any such conflict.
It is also wrong to assume that all the countries surrounding India (excluding Pakistan) will support China. Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal are unlikely to go to war with India because they are much weaker militarily and doing so would alienate one of their security and trading partners. And even though these countries have strong economic ties to China, their populations (especially in recent times) have grown more wary of China. Therefore, these countries probably would not get involved and remain neutral in any such conflict.
I agree with you for the early stages of a world conflict; India supports from afar when they feel it's just.
In other words, in my very unprofessional opinion, I think Idia would, in one way or another, support whomever they felt was being victimized. Whomever starts a war, usually being viewed as the agreesor.
In this scenario, China is the aggressor against Taiwan and Russia is the aggressor against Ukraine. Having said that, India still, refuses to make any public announcement against Russia, but has sent aid to Ukraine.
"India has recently dispatched its twelfth consignment of humanitarian aid to Ukraine. This humanitarian aid and assistance is in keeping with the human-centric approach of the Indian Government."
If push comes to shove, if there is an actual WW3, Idia, being one of the biggest armies in the world, India would have to choose a side because failing to do so, would still be choosing. For example, if China and Russia were "winning " and Idia did nothing, that would be support of them by non-action and the same if US, Europe, and Asian Pacific were "winning " and India did nothing.
In that same light, if one side started gaining an advantage that would result in becoming a dominant superpower, for instance, lets say China is winning and the US economy has failed. Would India be cool with their Chinese NEIGHBORS being the only dominate military force left in the world? ... after their aggressions in Tibet and Taiwan?
I think that would be a silly bet to take agaist the future of India's sovereignty.
In times like these (early 2023), it's not hard to maintain an intelligent neutrality, but in times of world conflict it can easily become ignorant to hold onto said neutrality.
* just for conjecture, I seriously doubt we'll see anything like a WW3 in our lifetime.
@@MarcBrown if you think russia is the aggressor against ukraine, then you dont know what you're talking about. the current war started in 2014 with the maidan coup. Russia only now entered the existing war with the intention of finishing it. Its aim is not to conquer ukraine, but to secure the fate of the russian speaking ukranians. I suggest you don't take western propaganda seriously. It is pathetic to fall for your own propaganda.
Also would India go to war with china? Both ancient civilisations which have coexisted for all this time. Why would they fight for the sake of some imperial americans and their cronies. It seems only sensible to maintain good relations because you can't chose your neighbours. USA is on the other side of the world but india and china share a massive border. Whatever repercussions of not supporting usa would be, they'll dwarf against the ones coming from an india-china war. Both countries are well aware that the only people who will benefit from and indo-china war are the west.
If the west is going to refuse trade relations due to a reluctance of india choosing a side, then india can adapt. Indians don't like to be talked to in that tone. At the end of the day, the nature of USA has been very clearly revealed in the AUKUS agreement when they snubbed France. Look what the americans did to the German-Russian gas pipeline Nordstream 2. Is that the country India wants to be allied with? Don't be ridiculous. It's like making a deal with the devil.
"It is dangerous to be the enemy of america but it is fatal to be its ally."- Henry Kissinger(decorated war criminal).
"sleep tight tonight boys"
Will do, already served. Good luck, zoomers!
(Chuckles in DD-214) I should probably have a blanket made.
This feels like the most FBI propoganda😂
Once he "joined forces" with a think-tank (forget the name of it, could be a "society"), it told me that it was all over.
wtf does FBI have anything to do with geopolitic ?
@@leitodamien3835 wtf is propoganda?
It's just jerk off propaganda
I feel like these young people you know really over use the term CEO... Mean I guess it's technically correct but traditional CEOs typically have decades of experience in management. Like we had never heard of CEOs under 45 in the 2000s
i dont understand how WIAH expects Pakistan to lose all land till the indus river, which inhabits tens of millions of People, and collapse as a state without using its nuclear weapons....seriously how can u possibly conceive such an scenario?
Only fully adopting culture of turks and arabs, with sharia law can save pakistan tbh ☝🏼✨☝🏼
@@snipescyth7944 Lol no. Food will save pakistan. Please give them wheat.
yeah i have no clue either those nukes finna start flying so fast lmao
Yeah Pakistan is one country no one has an interest in seeing collapse, even India. I'm legitimately terrified that if the Pakistani government continues to disintegrate, terrorists will swoop in, seize the nukes, and dirty bombs will start showing up all over the globe. US, Europe, China, India, West Africa, anyone the fundamentalist Muslims have beef with.
pakistan has tactical nukes which are low quality. Plus nukes are useless againt aircraft
I could have gotten this information from the mainstream media...
“America and communist Vietnam are now strong allies”
No, they are not. They are barely allies of convenience, Vietnam has a unique relationship with China and maintains relations with Russia, China and the US, this is one issue I found in this video, of which there are many. I enjoy your content but you speak as though you’re an expert on any of this when it’s clear you only have a surface level of knowledge on anything you talk about. This is dangerous as some people take what you say as gospel and you have a massive platform.
Your right. Vietnam is a "potential" allie.
The US is working on tha front. At the moment vietnam is neutral, and will not be happy with chinas expansion. Vietnam did not vote in the un against russia or china in any vote for the last 20 years, but votet against us allies (not against the us)
He has a very American way at looking at things.
India-US could do so much more together which would benefit both parties. But as long as US is under Biden not much can improve. US's diplomacy under him is weird. Because of their policies they lost Saudi Arabia as an ally and pushed it towards China, it still supports Pakistan and provides military help to them even though Pak has betrayed US numerous times. By doing this US has earned quite a bad name here in India. It claims it wants to be our ally, even we would like good relations with US but for that it will have to prove itself as a reliable partner first.
I don't want to be allied with US or any Western countries.
Nay, I think this relationship shouldn't change..... We'd be pulled into various unnecessary wars if that happens.
Best is that we use their fears of a growing china and build ourselves up as much as possible but in the end of it still be neutral
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones". -- Albert Einstein
@@nupnorth Depends. Basically on the amount of affectation of the atmosphere.
The northern hemisphere would be far more affected, no doubt (way more so than the Southern one, with the possible exception of China, and the equatorial regions)
But a nuclear winter severe enough would render chaos upon crops, worldwide.
Less based in fact, more emphasis. Essentially whatever governments make ("what weapons") will be replaced with stuff found on the ground (guess)
World war 3 will most likely be a conflict in space. There is nothing on Earth for major powers to risk such a war
Got to disagree with Albert here.
@@mohdadeeb1829 Albert must've thought that ever dick and Tom after the invention of splitting the atom would easily get one.
I like how Thailand is always passive and neutral lol
First of all, much respect to you for reviewing honestly your past predictions.
Now, I don't see why China would ban itself for decades from international relationships as Russia is currently doing. Why would they go to India, korea, etc?!
They want to topple the US hegemony, by establishing an alternative market and financial system. Not by being cut off from the rest of the world.
They want to regain Taiwan due to nationalism which can override common sense. They are trying to compete with America though markets and diplomacy and I seriously hope you're right in thinking this is the direction they focus on.
@@Sparrow24847 Xi surely knows Taiwan has never been a part of China and the KMT, who fled to the now PRC, entered Japanese Taiwan, under Western occupation. Faux accounts of history and nationalism can feed justification to act against Taiwan. More likely, China is trying to gain control Taiwan for another reason: Projection of power beyond the First Island Chain.
Something I think miss out.. decision is not made by them. It's made by one. Someone who wants to leave some footprint in the history, and why would u think he will care about normal ppl lives.
No matter how the country will turn to be. What does it matter of his life. He is still the top class with alot wealth and power.
@@TakealookX he's soooo far from Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot standards.
Yes, Xi is an autocratic maniac, but I think he knows the risks of falling are far greater from the inside than from foreign powers. That's also why China always try to promote a Westphalian approach (every country minds it's own internal policy). Taiwan is viewed by CCP as their backyard, and an existential threat to China's unity. Further than that, there is not much risk.
Bro..."India will expand its boundary till Indus river and will let Taliban take rest of Pakistan" made me chuckle..
Well in regards to WW2 tactics we haven't seen the same type of technological advances such as the machine gun or the airplane today ergo the tactics shouldn't change much. Got drones dropping grenades or mortar rounds? Well just have sufficient overhead cover and you should be fine
We need to see what happens when you lob 20 200kg tungsten rods into orbit with a Falcon Heavy and see what they do to overhead cover then.
@@pbmccain that's my point, that sort of technology would change how wars are fought. Right now those don't exist to the best of my knowledge and since the Russians don't have them I'm not surprised that WW2 tactics are being used.
@@pbmccain you watch too many sci fi videos, things that are cool but arent remotely practical or efficient
I love these videos, but I wish they'd have more sources. 12:49 is what I'm specifically referring to, there're other examples of such lack of sources but this is the one thus far has really stood out to me. It makes sense given everything else to be true about Chinese bureaucracy, but where are you getting these anecdotes from?
Otherwise, love the video thus far.
gonna make some guesses before watching the video.
-USA is gonna wreck other countries.
-Europe is gonna suffer
-China
well you guess the first 2 right. China looses long term even if they managed to take Taiwan.
China always erupts in civil war whenever they get enough power. Hell, they haven't even finished up their current civil war with Taiwan. China has had the most Civil Wars of all nations and its not even close.
@@avroarchitect1793Which is why they haven't taken Taiwan they have long term plans
@@anasqader3851 that's just propaganda. They can't even get two departments of their government on the same page. They may have ambitions but they just project the image of being these grand geopolitical chess masters. It's all face not substance. Especially now that the war in Ukraine has proven some of their fundamental assumptions wrong.
*I know not what weapons WW3 will be fought with, but WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones.*
- *_Albert Einstein_*
E
Eg
WW3
Nice