• N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Taking a bribe to let China reverse engineer our next generation fighter jet should be the kind of thing that has consequences. That’s going to cost a lot of lives down the road if things go sideways.

    • Soleos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      This sale is horrible for many reasons including military intelligence. However a lot of the responses seem a bit ignorant of the current state of things. I’m sure there are lots of key technologies in materials, aerospace engineering, and digital warfare let alone the strategic intelligence of capabilities. However, China also already has many of the F-35 plans, enough to build a version of their own in the J-35. These fighters are also no longer next gen fighters. They are current 5th gen. Both US and China are developing their next 6th gen fighters.

      • Bloefz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 days ago

        It could also cost our lives as a US “ally”. Since they are the only fighter jet my country (Holland) is buying. Since China is a strong supporter of Russia it’s sure that they will get access to any countermeasures as well.

        IMO we should sell those things and buy something else like the much cheaper alternatives from Europe.

        But my country is also becoming pretty fascist and idealises America so they probably will just cave.

        At least there’s still countries like Spain who have already cancelled their F-35 order 👏

      • balsoft@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        If you look at the history of military operations performed by both countries, it’s pretty clear which one is the more likely option

          • balsoft@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            China nowadays has the capacity to steamroll half of asia into compliance. Instead they build alliances/partnerships via trade, even with countries they ideologically disagree with. It’s less profitable in the short-term but leads to more predictable and stable development in the region, which benefits them massively in the long-term. Crazy what you can do if you think in centuries and not quarters.

            • powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              They don’t have capacity to deal with the US intervening. If not for that, they would 100% be steamrolling everything they could. They’ve done it many times before and they’ll do it again, just like everybody else in history.

              • balsoft@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                China has successfully withstood US intervention and helped communist forces prevail in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. They also semi-successfully done the same in Korea.

                They don’t fear US intervention much, it’s just that their modern foreign policy is targeted at stability and growth rather than immediate overthrow of capitalism.

                • powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  If China tried to invade a country, that would give the US an excuse to come to that country’s defense, and China does not have the resources to deal with that. Since they can’t use hard power, they’re using soft power.

                  Expecting altruism in geopolitics is hopelessly naïve.

                  • balsoft@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    I don’t expect altruism. Stability and economic prosperity in the region is directly beneficial and profitable to China.

              • balsoft@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                ¿Por qué no los dos? I mean, if you actually go to developing nations you will see that they are investing into real infrastructure that improves the standards of living dramatically. They also intend to turn some profit off of it. Most likely much of that profit will be in building long-term economic relations, rather than immediate rent-seeking, which can be viewed as “trapping nations in debt traps”, or as “investing into development”. They also invest with much fewer strings attached compared to IMF, which is a win comparatively speaking.

                  • balsoft@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    Nah, I mean that what they’re doing isn’t charity (so they are doing the debt trap thing on some level), but it’s also beneficial for populations of countries they invest in, and better than whatever the fuck IMF is doing.

    • comfy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      It echoes of China before their ~2011 anti-corruption campaign, they had a serious issue in previous decades where the CIA would basically pay-to-win, bribing officers to give promotions to their confederates. The point being, a corrupt system is easy to exploit, for any country that has some spare change to use.