This is what I’m getting at. They could have lived glorious lives beyond what any of us could imagine.
But no. They had to hurt others. Seriously damaged people.
They weren’t the only ones, the whole WWI situation could’ve been resolved without violence and people could’ve continued to prosper but nooooo.
Alternatively the whole thing was triggered by the need to contain revolutionary undercurrents in the lower classes, but even in that case sharing a bit of wealth would’ve been far cheaper than the war.
I truly hope this doesn’t become necessary, but the DoperVerse could probably help you pull something like this DIY dialysis rig together: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSkXXw2flE8
True, especially if the U.S. continues to stick their nose where it doesn’t belong.
I’m not sure I understand your point. China has a capitalist economy and a communist government. And China used to have a communist economy and a communist government. And the switchover was recent enough that there are plenty of living people who experienced it.
Are you saying that people were more prosperous under the old communist/communist system than they are under the current capitalist/communist system? If so, I don’t see any evidence which supports that.
I think the experience of most Chinese people is that there’s more prosperity under the current half-and-half system. And it’s not unreasonable of them to consider that if going from no capitalism to fifty percent capitalism made them more prosperous than going from fifty percent capitalism to one hundred percent capitalism would cause a further increase in prosperity.
A true WW3 requires mass destruction. Iran doesn’t have the power to create mass destruction for the world.
The only true mass destruction situation is WMD that I can think of.
Even a conventional war between the US and China would not be as massive as what happened in WW2 or WW1. Those wars had massive land invasions. I don’t think there would be any large scale land invasions in WW3 between the US vs China. It would more be a naval war, air force war, missile war, etc. Neither the US or China really has the ability to conduct a mass land invasion against the other country. The US isn’t going to send 4 million troops to conquer a nation of 1.3 billion. And Chinas transport ships would be sunk long before they got to the US (and US transport ships would be sunk before they got to China).
It depends on whether mutually assured destruction holds up or not. Either a small nation will have ICBMs and WMDs; or there will be a massive war between China vs the US and its allies.
@vbob…umm, I’m gonna say probably not. A kitchen table invasive medical procedure doesn’t feel real reliable. Or safe.
What, with thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, [plus a few total dipsticks], rooting for success?
I have to admit I’d be very reluctant myself, but was intrigued that someone had even tried DIY dialysis, and fairly successfully.
Also, and I could be all wet here, but I don’t see any Ford plant being converted to produce and F-35 every 40 minutes, or whatever they were pulling off in WW2.
Modern kit is so advanced and complex, not to mention expensive, I have a feeling we’ll be out of armaments pretty quickly.
And as for moving hundreds of thousands or millions of troops across oceans, how would you do that in an era of satellites? I’d assume troop ships and transport planes would be sitting ducks in a world where you know exactly where they all are.
The Trump administration is already showing signs of giving up on this because oil prices shot up. That stunning event seems to have come as a total surprise to them.
My expectation is they’ll just wind the attack down and claim victory. That was always my expectation, just now we know the specific trigger.
The question people are throwing around is the possibility of an attempted invasion of Taiwan. While China can’t invade the US, they are working on the ability to invade Taiwan.
If the US intervenes, the idea is to prevent an invasion but there is a possibility of ground forces clashing, but naturally not at the scale of WWII.
Also, it would be hard for this to escalate into WWIII because there isn’t presently the kind of webs of alliances that kicked off both World Wars. China and the US fighting wouldn’t be a world war, even if they went nuclear.
That said, I suspect the distinction would feel fairly arbitrary to people living in the aftermath.