China’s Defense Budget: Spending What’s Necessary to Beat the Americans

[DudleySmith]

China’s Defense Budget: Spending What’s Necessary to Beat the Americans

Commentary It’s that time of year when China announces its defense budget. In 2022, defense spending is set ...

www.theepochtimes.com

Defense is the top priority for the CCP—and there are no Chinese Bernie Sanders or Green New Dealer types who will complain about the defense budget. And once the PLA can outmatch the U.S. military, every other nation will fall into line. That’s worth almost any price.


There’s a limit to defense spending, however. Anything that’s needed from overseas—such as iron ore to build steel, technology, “dual-use” equipment and technology, and landing and stevedoring fees for PLA aircraft and ships stopping off at overseas ports and airfields—all must be paid for in a currency that’s convertible (that a foreigner will accept), which the yuan isn’t.


To sum up, while the CCP can print up whatever cash it needs for domestic military expenditures, it needs to obtain convertible currency to pay for overseas expenses.


So there are effectively two different defense accounts—one that’s domestic and more or less unlimited and one that’s overseas and dependent on available foreign exchange.


....


“Instead of building the force that can take on and defeat a peer adversary like the PLA, DoD leaders are rudderless when it comes to restructuring the Pentagon and getting more bang for the buck. Instead, the current crop of political appointees and careerists spend more time and energy on non-warfighting domestic political rhetoric. As I noted last year, America needs supersonic and long-range ASCMs [anti-ship cruise missiles] that will sink the PLA Navy invasion Fleet. Where are they? The Pacific Fleet has been pleading for them in large numbers for almost two decades.”

Meanwhile, China keeps spending whatever it takes to defeat the United States. And it won’t run out of yuan. Wall Street and industry appear to be willing to make sure it has the U.S. dollars it needs to round things out.

Now, that’s a defense budget with Chinese characteristics.



Indeed. Keep pandering to multi-national pirates and crime syndicates posing as 'free market' corporations, and lose your country.

 

[Donald H]

A dollar spent in China could possibly produce as much as ten dollars in America. Russia stayed neck and neck with America in the arms race because of it's resources being available to industry without interference of capitalism's need for profit.

China's technology is at least equal to America's and is superior if they can borrow from Russia. This indicates that America is not going to enter into an arms race with China.

Measures are already being taken by America to cut any Russian involvement out of the equation. And China can't be permitted to have another 10 years to catch up.

These are the reasons why America's war with Russia is so vitally important.

Best hopes have to be in Russia's resolve dissolving with Putin's death, and thinking that Russia has no resolve without him.

The Cuban missile crisiss should have been a lesson to America on Russia's resolve that was demonstrated by Kruschev.

The truth of course isn't condusive to the propaganda that affords the American people the confidence needed to stay the course with Russia.

 

[jwoodie]

It seems unrealistic to expect China (or any other major nation) to prostrate itself before the U.S. Military. Countries used to recognize "spheres of influence" which were generally respected unless vital interests were threatened. It does not seem reasonable that the United States should have a vital interest in every corner of the globe. Neither do I think that the U.S. Navy should be tasked with maintaining absolute supremacy over every international waterway.

However, I do think that we should pursue a "preventative defense" strategy that provides for long-range interception of potential threats against ourselves or our treaty allies. We can still sell defensive weaponry and deliver humanitarian supplies to third parties, but not go to war for them.

 

[Dekster]

It seems unrealistic to expect China (or any other major nation) to prostrate itself before the U.S. Military. Countries used to recognize "spheres of influence" which were generally respected unless vital interests were threatened. It does not seem reasonable that the United States should have a vital interest in every corner of the globe. Neither do I think that the U.S. Navy should be tasked with maintaining absolute supremacy over every international waterway.

However, I do think that we should pursue a "preventative defense" strategy that provides for long-range interception of potential threats against ourselves or our treaty allies. We can still sell defensive weaponry and deliver humanitarian supplies to third parties, but not go to war for them.

Not really what is happening though. China is building a military intended to be able to assert itself regionally and close to mainland China. What too many fail to appreciate is that China might very well be able to flatten our Navy with land-based missiles. They are building out in anticipation of the US flexing in their backyard. Not a bad strategy on their part, particularly given our Pavlovian response to fighting anywhere in the world save sub-Saharan Africa.

 

[DudleySmith]

Not really what is happening though. China is building a military intended to be able to assert itself regionally and close to mainland China. What too many fail to appreciate is that China might very well be able to flatten our Navy with land-based missiles. They are building out in anticipation of the US flexing in their backyard. Not a bad strategy on their part, particularly given our Pavlovian response to fighting anywhere in the world save sub-Saharan Africa.

The have their eyes on Africa and the ME, with a strategy of surrounding India, their main continental enemy. If they can nip off the Phillipines and a few other strategic Pac Rim countries, they will. There is probably a major Depression coming, which is when we will be at our weakest. In the short run they don't have to be big enough to defeat us, just big enough to stand us down, given how corrupt and 'internationalist' our own elites are.

 

[Dekster]

The have their eyes on Africa and the ME, with a strategy of surrounding India, their main continental enemy. If they can nip off the Phillipines and a few other strategic Pac Rim countries, they will. There is probably a major Depression coming, which is when we will be at our weakest. In the short run they don't have to be big enough to defeat us, just big enough to stand us down, given how corrupt and 'internationalist' our own elites are.

I don'tthink they have their eye on Africa for anything other than market exploitation. Same with the ME. It is about the economic security side of national defense. The more markets you have and the more currencies you hold, the harder it is to sanction you.

 

[DudleySmith]

I don'tthink they have their eye on Africa for anything other than market exploitation. Same with the ME. It is about the economic security side of national defense. The more markets you have and the more currencies you hold, the harder it is to sanction you.

Control their economies and you control the countries. including their armies and police.